has”

final.»

nun
as...
..

é.
ihumm

8 55

p
51..

 

 

1 :s‘

t

3.... .{2 V
(9.11%... 32h” .IFk:
- f. I:- ‘u”.‘. FI‘V

(I31, 1.15:2. ,

 

A: . I
a, 2:33.: .\ . ab
(1.. ,

HIS“,
H". 5

air

.5; V 4.
I!
II

9' :rl

 

is: {:21
y .

. u l
2334... )
t. V‘.‘ , (r...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a“:
n
.I my}; :
‘ t \L
l light-vi
.\:..|0~ I.
(HI, .
. In
Vfili. inflalivx ,
.1 . ‘r -
‘ ... r3}..)....v.{s;lx..!s
.11 31.3501“
5 4‘9? u.iifi.:..t
hid,

 

THES’S

£000

 

 

M.S.

LIBRARY
Michigan State
Unlverslty

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

Factors Affecting Creeping Bentgrass Quality of Three
Different Putting Green Construction Methods

presented by

John Andrew Hardy

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

0.3.8.

degree in

 

llllllllll

 

 

 

ITYU

Ulllllllllllll

74 072

 

 

 

MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

PLACE IN REIURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLH) with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

AUGfi 9520953

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

moo mimosa,“

 

FACTORS AFFECTING CREEPING BENTGRASS QUALITY OF THREE
DIFFERENT PUTTING GREEN CONSTRUCTION METHODS

By

John Andrew Hardy

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTERS OF SCIENCE

Crop and Soil Sciences Department

1 999

ABSTRACT

FACTORS AFFECTING CREEPING'BENTGRASS QUALITY OF THREE
DIFFERENT PUTTING GREEN CONSTRUCTION METHODS

By

John Andrew Hardy

Two studies were initiated in 1996 to evaluate the long-term response of
three different putting green root zones (circa 1993) to various management
inputs. The three root zones were an 80:20 (sandzpeat v/v)’ mixture built to United
States Golf Association (USGA) recommendations, an 80:10:10 (sand:soil:peat
vlvlv) mixture built with subsurface drainage tile, and an unammended sandy
clay loam textured (58% sand, 20.5% silt, 21.5% clay) “push-up” style green. A
rolling factor was included as a split plot across the three construction
methods/soil types. The two studies were conducted on these plots as split plots
across the rolling factor. The first study examined the effects of plant growth
regulators (PGR’s) (trinexapac-ethyl and flurprimidol) on putting green speed and
creeping bentgrass quality. PGR’s did show differences in ball roll distance
between 6 and 14 days after application. Rolling three times per week
consistently increased ball roll distance. The application of flurprimidol adversely
affected turfgrass color. Dollar spot (Sclerotinia homoeocarpa) incidence was
reduced when rolling was applied. The second study investigated use of crumb

rubber as a topdressing amendment into putting green collars. The greatest

depth of crumb rubber (9.5mm) produced both the highest color and quality

ratings. Poa annua percentages were lowest in 9.5mm topdressing depth.

Copyright by
John Andrew Hardy
1999

To my parents, Michael and Evelyn, whose love, support and gift of life have
made all this possible.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

There are many people who deserve a great deal of gratitude in helping
me meet complete this major milestone in my life. I would first like to thank Dr.
John (Trey) Rogers, III for his guidance, support, patience and belief in my
abilities. It has undoubtedly been one of the greatest experiences of my life. Not
only were the experiences he extended to me in the research field a tremendous
enrichment, but the vast opportunities he provided to become an integral part of
the teaching program here at Michigan State University were also ones that gave
me great hope and courage for my future. My graduate committee, Dr. James
Crum, Dr. Paul Rieke and Dr. Joseph Vargas, also deserve special recognition
for their insights, time and effort they provided to me. I would also like to thank
my fellow graduate students not only for their support but most importantly their
friendship, which made this experience unforgettable. Though often not given the
recognition they deserve, I would like to thank the student workers who gave so
much time and effort to my project, namely Colleen LaRoue, Erik Ostlund, Kirk
Carls and Roger Barker. Finally, I’m forever indebted to my family for their love

and support in aspiring to live life to its fullest.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables

List of Figures

Introduction

General Materials and Methods

Chapter One: The Effects of Plant Growth Regulators and
Rolling on Three Putting Green Construction Methods

Specific Materials and Methods
Results and Discussion
Conclusions

Chapter Two: The Effects of Topdressing with Crumb Rubber

on Creeping Bentgrass Quality on Putting Green Collars
Constructed with Three Different Soil Types

Specific Materials and Methods
Results and Discussion
Conclusions

Appendices
Appendix A

References

vii

Page
viii

xiii

gtow

39
39

41
67

69

7O

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects on
ball roll distance on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass
Research Center, East Lansing, MI, 1996.

Table 2. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects on
ball roll distance on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass
Research Center, East Lansing, MI, 1997.

Table 3. Main effects of construction type, rolling and plant growth
regulator (PGR) on ball roll distance in centimeters on putting
greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing,
MI, 1996.

Table 4. Main effects of construction type, rolling and plant growth
regulator (PGR) on ball roll distance in centimeters on putting
greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing,
MI, 1997.

Table 5. Rolling by plant growth regulator (PGR) means on ball roll
distance in centimeters on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass
Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 6. Soil by plant growth regulator (PGR) means for PGR
treatments on ball roll distance in centimeters on putting greens at
the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI, 1997.

Table 7. Soil by roll means on ball roll distance in centimeters on
putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East
Lansing, MI.

Table 8. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects on
color ratings on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research
Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 9. Effects of construction type, rolling, plant growth regulator
(PGR) treatments on color ratings on putting greens at the Hancock
Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 10. Roll by plant growth regulator interaction for color ratings

on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East
Lansing, MI, 1997.

viii

Page
10

11

13

14

15

17

18

20

Table 11. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects on
quality ratings on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass
Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 12. Effects of construction type, rolling, plant growth
regulator (PGR) treatments on quality ratings on putting greens at
the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 13. Quality ratings for the significant soil-by-roll and soil-by-
PGR interactions on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass
Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 14. Mean squares and significance of treatments on root
mass on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research
Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 15. Effects of construction type, rolling, plant growth (PGR)
regulator treatments of 1996 on root weights in grams on putting

greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing,
MI.

Table 16. Soil by rolling interaction for root weights (grams) on
putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East
Lansing, MI.

Table 17. Soil by plant growth regulator interaction for root weights
from 5.0-10.0cm depth on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass
Research Center, East Lansing, MI, 1996.

Table 18. Roll by plant growth regulator interaction for root weights
(grams) from 5.0-10.0cm depth on putting greens at the Hancock
Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI, 1996.

Table 19. Soil by roll by plant growth regulator interaction for root
weights (grams) from putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass
Research Center, East Lansing, MI, 1996.

Table 20. Mean squares and significant treatments for dollar spot
counts, clipping weights, snowmold counts, and cutworm damage
counts on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research
Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 21. Main effects of construction type, rolling, plant growth
regulator treatments on dollar spot counts, cutwonn damage, and
root length on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research
Center, East Lansing, MI.

21

22

23

25

26

26

27

27

28

3O

31

Table 22. Soil by roll interaction means for dollar spot counts and
clipping weights on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass
Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 23. Roll by plant growth regulator interaction for clipping
weights at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing,
MI, 21-July, 1997.

Table 24. Means squares and significance of treatments for dollar

spot counts, clipping weights, cutworm damage counts, root length,

snowmold, thatch weight and peak deceleration on putting greens
at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI,
1996.

Table 25. Soil by roll interactions for peak deceleration (Gm) on
putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East
Lansing, MI, 1997.

Table 26. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects for
color ratings of putting greens collars at the Hancock Turfgrass
Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 27. Main effects of construction type, rolling, and the
topdressing treatments on color ratings on putting green collars at
the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 28. Color ratings for the significant soil-by-roll and soil-by-
topdressing treatment interactions on putting green collars at the
Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 29. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects on

quality of putting greens collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research

Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 30. Main effects of construction type, rolling, and the

topdressing treatments on quality ratings on putting green collars at

the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, Ml.

Table 31. Soil by roll by topdressing treatment interaction for quality
ratings on putting green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research

Center, East Lansing, MI 1997.

Table 32. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects on
Poa annua invasion ratings on putting green collars at the
Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

33

33

35

43

46

47

48

51

Table 33. Effects of construction type, rolling, and the topdressing
treatments on Poa annua invasion ratings on putting green collars
at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 34. Roll by topdressing treatment interaction for Poa annua
invasion ratings on putting green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass
Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 35. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects of
shearvane and peak deceleration (Gm) on putting green collars at
the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 36. Effects of construction type, rolling, and the topdressing
treatments on shearvane resistance (Nm) and peak deceleration
(Gm) on putting green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research
Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 37. Soil by roll interaction for shearvane resistance (Nm) and
peak deceleration (Gm) on putting green collars at the Hancock
Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI, 1996.

Table 38. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects of
dollar spot counts on putting green collars at the Hancock
Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 39. Main effects of construction type, rolling, and the
topdressing treatments on dollar spot counts on putting green
collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing,
MI 1 996.

Table 40. Soil by topdressing interaction on dollar spot counts on
putting green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center,
East Lansing, MI, 1996.

Table 41. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects of
root mass measurements on putting green collars at the Hancock
Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 42. Main effects of construction type, rolling, topdressing
treatments on root weights on putting greens collars at the Hancock
Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI 1996.

Table 43. Main effects of construction type, rolling, topdressing

treatments on root weights on putting greens collars at the Hancock
Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI 1997.

xi

52

52

54

55

55

58

59

59

61

62

62

Table 44. Root weight values (mg) for the significant rolling-by-soil
and soil-by- topdressing treatment interactions on putting green
collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing,
MI, 1996.

Table 45. Roll-by-topdressing treatment interaction for root weights
. (mg) on putting green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research
Center, East Lansing, MI, 1997.

Table 46. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects of
thatch depth, thatch weight, soil on putting green collars at the
Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 47. Effects of construction type, rolling, and the topdressing
treatments on thatch depth in millimeters on putting green collars at
the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Table 48. Particle size analysis of sand used in USGA sandzpeat
(80:20) mixture.

Table 49. Particle size analysis of sand used in sand:soil:peat
(80:10:10) mixture.

Table 50. Particle size analysis of crumb rubber used for
topdressing material in putting green collars.

xii

63

63

65

69

69

69

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Photograph of roller mounted with metal golf spikes. The roller is inserted on a
Tom Greensmaster 3000 (Bloomingdale, MN) in place of the cutting units.

xiii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

8RD = Ball Roll Distance

PGR = Plant Growth Regulator

xiv

INTRODUCTION

The putting green is the focus of most golf courses in terms of playability.
Therefore, construction and maintenance have long been primary topics for
discussion and research. The United States Golf Association (USGA) has made
recommendations for putting green construction since 1960 (USGA Green
Section Staff, 1960). The USGA method has proven effective over the years
though other methods have been used (Beard, 1982). There has been little
research reported of comparisons of USGA specification putting greens to other
putting green construction methods because of the difficulty in the experimental
design and replication necessary to draw valid statistical conclusions (Lodge at.

- al., 1991; Lodge and Lawson, 1993). Another reason for doing this work is that
many golf courses have differently constructed putting greens. There has been
work evaluating management practices on greens regarding almost all phases of
putting green management, however there are no comparisons of management
practices during the post grow-in stage (3-7 years after establishment) regarding
different root zone mixes.

The practice of rolling putting greens has been in place for almost a
century (Anonymous, 1954). Before the implementation of modern putting green
cultural practices, improved turfgrass varieties and sophisticated mowing
equipment, superintendents included rolling in their management regimes to
improve putting conditions (Hartwiger, 1996). As the negative effects of
compaction became more prevalent (Beard, 1973) many superintendents omitted

rolling from their management regimes for fear of turf loss from soil compaction.

In recent years rolling has returned to management practices of many
superintendents around the United States. With the proliferation of high sand
content greens and the introduction of lightweight greens rollers, the practice of
rolling has become a viable alternative for superintendents who have
experienced continued pressure to produce smoother, faster, and more
consistent putting surfaces (Hartwiger, 1996). Research has shown that rolling
increases ball roll distance for up to 48hrs after rolling (Hamilton et al, 1994).
Hartwiger et al (1994) found that rolling with a lightweight greens roller four times
per week reduced putting green quality after one year on both USGA and native
soils. The long term effects of rolling on different soil types, however, needs to
be determined.

Plant growth regulators (PGR’s) which include gibberellic acid
biosynthesis inhibitors are known to decrease cell elongation (Kaufmann, 1986)
and clipping yields (Dernoeden, 1984; Diesburg and Christians, 1989). Other
known effects of PGR's are darker green color and increased turfgrass density
with occasional temporary phytotoxic responses (Dernoeden, 1984; Watschke
1981 ). With the reduced clipping production as a result of PGR applications,
there is a potential for increased ball roll distance (8RD). The effects of PGR’s on
BRD have been examined and results between the different studies were
inconclusive with regard to their effects on 8RD. Increased BRD was observed
with the application of PGR’s by Branham (1991) and Rogers et. al. (1992) while
no differences were recorded by Rogers et. al. (1993) and Yelverton (1998).

These research projects examined PGR’s effects on 8R0 on putting greens with

only one soil type. No research has been conducted examining the response of
different soil types to the application of PGR’s and therefore warrants the
investigation of this problem.

The putting green collar has long been an area of concern for golf course
superintendents (Anonymous, 1954; Demoeden, 1994). Due to traffic patterns
from putting green mowers and on many putting greens, limited entry and exit
points to the putting green, collars are often subject to intensive wear that is
difficult to manage. Topdressing crumb rubber has proven to be an effective
method for improving quality on high trafficked turfgrass stands maintained
above 16mm (Rogers et. al. 1998). Topdressing crumb rubber into putting green
collars, however, has not been investigated.

As a result, two main objectives exist to test the responses of the three
most commonly utilized putting green root zone mixes; USGA, 80:10:10, and
native soil and their response to rolling.

The two main objectives were:

1) To determine the effects of two PGR’s and a control on ball roll distance

and putting green quality as effected by three putting green root zones

and frequent lightweight rolling.

2) To determine the effects of topdressing crumb rubber into putting

greens collars as influenced by three putting green root zones and

frequent lightweight rolling.

General Materials and Methods

Both studies were conducted on the same set of research plots and were
managed simultaneously. Therefore the management practices presented below
cover each chapter. Specific materials and methods for the respective studies
are presented at the beginning of each chapter.

The research was conducted on a 1337m2 (36.6m x 36.6m) putting green
at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center from May 1996 to October 1997. The
putting green was constructed in the summer of 1992 and seeded with
Penncross creeping bentgrass (Agrostis palustris) in spring 1993. The plots were
constructed with the purpose of comparing three different putting green
construction methods and their response to various maintenance inputs. Each
root zone plot was 12.2m x 12.2m and was arranged in a randomized complete
block design replicated three times. The three construction methods consisted of:
an 80:20 (sandzpeat vlv) (99.2% sand + 0.8% silt + clay) (Table 48, Appendix)
mixture built to USGA putting green construction recommendations; an 80:10:10
(sand:soil:peat vlvlv) (98.8% sand + 1.2% silt + clay) (Table 49, Appendix)
mixture built with subsurface tile drainage; and an unamended sandy clay loam
(58% sand, 20.5% silt, 21.5% clay) “push-up” style green. Each construction
method plot (12.2m x 12.2m) was arranged in a randomized complete block
design and replicated three times. These construction methods were chosen
based on the popularity of their use in putting greens constructed in Michigan
and around the United States. Since the construction of the plots in 1992

sand topdressing was applied to all plots at 2-3 week intervals at a rate of 0.8mm

per application in conjunction with the growth rate of the grass. By the end of the
study (1997) a layer of sand accumulated on the greens totaling 26mm. Each
construction method plot has individual irrigation control and was irrigated on an
as needed basis.

A rolling factor was split over each root zone plot to compare its effects on
the three different root zones. Rolling was applied with an Olathe (Olathe
Manufacturing Inc., Industrial Airport, KS.) lightweight greens roller three times
per week (Monday, Wednesday, Friday) immediately after the plots were mowed.

The putting green plots were mowed six days per week throughout each
season at a height of 3.8mm with a Toro GM1000 (Bloomingdale, MN). The
putting green collar plots were mowed three days per week (Monday,
Wednesday, Friday) at a height of 9.5mm with a Ransomes Greenspro 22.
Nitrogen was applied on a monthly basis at a rate of 49 kg/ ha! month.

In the interest of simulating the foot traffic normally subjected to putting
greens, a traffic simulator was constructed. A Toro Greensmaster 3000
(Bloomingdale, MN) triplex greens mower was fitted with rollers in place of the
cutting units with metal golf shoe spikes mounted on the rollers to apply the traffic
(Figure 1). Traffic was applied by making two passes five times per week over
the plots to simulate foot traffic the foot traffic of 150 rounds of golf within a 60cm
diameter of the golf hole. This calibration was made by counting the number of
foot steps taken by golfers in that area, counting the number of spikes on the
bottom of typical golf shoes, and associating that with the number of spikes

which contact the ground from the traffic simulator.

Figure 1. Photograph of roller mounted with metal golf spikes. The roller is

inserted on a Toro Greensmaster 3000 (Bloomingdale, MN) in place of the

cutting units.

 

Chapter 1

THE EFFECTS OF PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS AND ROLLING ON
THREE PUTTING GREEN CONSTRUCTION METHODS

Specific Materials and Methods

The experimental design was a 3 x 2 x 3 split split randomized complete
block design. Three construction methods/soil types consisted of the main
effects with a rolling factor split over the construction methods. A plant growth
regulator factor was then split over the rolling factor. PGR plots measured 1.1m x
4.3m.

The plant growth regulators (PGR’s) used were foliar absorbed
trinexapac—ethyl (Primo) and root abSorbed flurprimidol (Cutless). When the
study began PGR’s were not labeled for putting green use. Both PGR’s were
applied at 40% of the label rate, trinexapac-ethyl at 0.318L ha'1 and flurprimidol
at 0.673kg ha“. Applications were made at five-week intervals in both years of
the study beginning at the growing season and ending in September of each year
of the study, 1996 and 1997. Plots were sprayed with a hand-held boom sprayer

at a carrier volume of 897L ha“.

Data Collection
Ball roll distance (BRD) measurements were recorded three days per
week on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays for five weeks after each PGR

application during both years of the study. BRD measurements were recorded

with a Stimpmeter by taking three measurements in two directions for a total of
six measurements per plot.

Turfgrass color and quality ratings were recorded during both years of the
study. Ratings were recorded when differences in color were apparent. Overall
color and quality were rated on a scale from 1-9; 1 = poor, 9 = excellent, and 6 =
acceptable.

Disease ratings were recorded when disease outbreaks occurred during
both years of the study. Diseases recorded were; dollar spot (Sclerotinia
homoeocarpa) on 24-Jun and 2-Aug in 1996, microdochium patch (Microdochium
nivale) on 14-Apr-97, and yellow tuft (Scleropthera macrospora) on 8-Aug-97.
Dollar spot and microdochium patch were recorded according to the number of
spots occurring in each plot. Yellow tuft was visually rated on a scale from 0 -
100%.

Thatch depth (mm) was recorded in 1996. Three samples were taken with
a 2.54cm diameter soil probe from each plot measuring the longest visible root
and averaged. Depth was recorded in millimeters. Thatch weight was recorded
in 1997. Three samples were taken from each plot and averaged. Thatch
samples were weighed, ashed at 500°C for five hours and then reweighed.

Root length was recorded in August of 1996. Three samples were taken
from each plot and averaged. Root weight was recorded in October of 1996 and
1997. Three samples were collected from each plot at four depths; 0-2.5cm, 2.5-
5.0cm, 5-10cm, and 10-15cm. Root were separated from the soil by the

hydropneumatic eluriation system (Smucker et al, 1982). Roots were dried then

weighed, ashed at 500°C for five hours and then reweighed. Samples were
ashed to reduce variability from the presence of organic matter silt and clay
(Willard and McClure 1932).

Surface hardness, which was measured by evaluating impact absorption,
was collected in June 1997 using the Clegg Impact Soil Tester (Lafayette
Instruments C0,, Lafayette, IN) and the 2.25kg hammer. An average of three
measurements was recorded as transmitted to a hand-held read-out box. The
hammer was dropped randomly through the plot from a height of 0.46m (Rogers
and Waddington, 1990).

Clipping yields were recorded in July 1996 and 1997. The area of the
clippings removed was 1.75m2. The plots were allowed to grow for two days
prior to clipping removal. Clippings were collected, dried for 24 hours at 60°C,
and weighed.

Data were analyzed using SAS analysis of variance procedures for a 3-by-
2-by-3 factorial experiment in a randomized complete block, split-slpit plot design
with three replications. The three PGR treatments were split into the rolled and

not rolled plots.

Results and Discussion

Ball Roll Distance
Significant treatment effects from 1996 and 1997 are shown in Tables 1
and 2 respectively, with all three applications of PGR’s from each year

represented in both tables. Ball roll distance in soil types showed significant

Tflet. mumwmormwmmmummmmgmmmum
WRW Center, East LaWMI,1996.

Application #1 (14-June)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source of Variation at 7 DAT 10DAT 12 DAT 14 DAT 17 DAT 24 DAT
Replication 2 321 1343 450 “ 2280 116 137
Soil, S 2 24 1164 93 236 147 462
Error (a) 4 62 747 58 510 139 332
Roll. R 1 10581 "' 6542 '“ 13296 “' 2120 " 4914 "' 2275
S x R 2 377 220 440 231 673 413
Error (b) 6 155 142 58 216 244 739
PGR, P 2 1069 m 666 ”‘ 306 " 52 325 110
S x P 4 55 57 96 113 42 255
R x P 2 615 '“ 88 53 '" 33 5 16
S x R x P 4 20 70 17 192 111 199
Error (c) t 77 88 81 139 133 110
CV (96) 3.46 3.74 3.17 4.21 3.82 3.58
Application #2 (go-July)
Sauce of Variation d1 3 DAT 6 DAT 9 DAT 12 DAT 16 DAT 20 DAT
Replication 2 1127 “ 2806 407 9277 '“ 57774 5 '“
Soil, S 2 549 296 102 422 60261 894 ”
Error (a) 4 106 483 371 159 62727 68
Roll, R 1 16533 ... 6677 m 968 968 147522 24452 "'
S x R 2 920 1115 188 559 82867 - 707
Error (b) 6 362 374 301 226 69612 333
PGR, P 2 53 166 110 53 60518 155
S x P 4 90 73 206 53 61379 89
R x P 2 88 796 78 122 61379 306
S x R x P 4 311 31 153 56 59951 68
Error (0) it 208 306 204 112 63600 186
CV (16) 4.72 5.19 4.75 3.1 72.48 4.47
Application #3 (31 fig)
Source of Variation df 10 DAT 11 DAT 13 DAT 23 DAT 25 DAT 32 DAT
Replication 2 2377 276 376 166 254 290
Soil, S 2 238 142 399 1454 " 2017 “ 598
Enor (a) 4 1302 169 65 141 168 175
Roll, R 1 3043 ... 5031 '“ 3518 " 5031 '“ 1933 " 2908
S x R 2 279 327 263 130 111 356
Error (b) 6 134 270 262 67 223 775
PGR, P 2 75 350 " 104 1 168 52
S x P 4 15 23 158 204 45 89
R x P 2 69 652 '" 29 103 170 95
s x R x P 4 129 28 204 122 97 38
Error (c) t 71 93 159 107 123 194
CV (‘36) 2.75 3.03 3.85 3.23 3.37 4.34

 

"a " denim statistical significance at? < 0.01, 0.05 respectively

10

Table 2. Mean squares and significance oftreatment effects on ball roll distance on putting greens at the Hancock
Muse Research Center, East UWI, 1997.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Application #1 iZ8-May)
Source 01 Variation 01 7 DAT 11 DAT 16 DAT 21 DAT 26 DAT 35 DAT
Replication 2 832 27 “" 2782 “ 2628 " 1144 1651 “‘
Soil, 5 2 1583 “ 188 490 287 430 169
Error (a) 4 127 109 206 355 393 45
Rol, R 1 9840 ... 4798 "' 2355 “ 12 '” 5149 ... 892 ”‘
S x R 2 1010 1506 791 85 862 812 ”‘
Error (0) 6 610 337 276 707 325 333
PGR, P 2 958 ”' 1303 ’“ 561 " 306 “ 220 22
S x P 4 209 103 344 131 114 56
R x P 2 13 “ 482 “ 140 63 39 1
s x R x P 4 272 230 184 174 220 18
Enor (c) 24 87 171 164 82 220 1 13
CV (96) 3.1 4.0 4.0 2.7 5.9 3.5
Application #2 (4-July)
Source of Variation at 7 DAT 10 DAT 14 DAT 19 DAT 26 DAT 28 DAT
Replication 2 1687 “ 1825 389 172 1404 “ 107
Soil, 8 2 520 641 1396 824 499 669
Error (a) 4 230 346 230 768 80 229
Roll, R 1 11810 ... 18622 '“ 661 13682 “‘ 6081 ... 140 '“
S x R 2 944 " 391 44 56 74 153
Error (b) 6 112 251 271 94 388 694
PGR,P 2 604“ 1265" 835“ 38 485” 400m
S x P 4 98 199 43 56 53 35
R x P 2 246 65 149 193 250 33
s x R x P 4 197 119 120 33 73 45
Error(c) 24 155 256 162 118 111 60
CV (96) 3.7 5.1 3.8 3.8 3.1 2.3
Application #3 (14-AugL
Source of Variation at 11 DAT 13 DAT 15 DAT 20 DAT 22 DAT 38 DAT
Repication 2 147 350 29 746 “ 143 93
Soil, 5 2 605 38 439 98 '“ 112 1154
Error (a) 4 373 397 629 57 940 184
Roll. R 1 11720 '“ 24974 m 1619 “ 135 3871 “‘ 2355 "‘
S x R 2 242 837 " 575 31 322 683 ”
Enor (b) 6 194 120 226 697 183 69
PGR, P 2 7 " 1859 m 178 215 341 90
SxP 4 23 270 “ 141 114 218 23
R x P 2 289 2 240 149 90 10
S x R x P 4 49 161 73 122 145 163
Enor (c) 24 154 89 174 72 192 123
CV (96L 4.5 3.2 3.9 2.7 4.1 3.4

 

”‘, ” denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively

11

differences five times through both years of the study. When these differences
were recorded, the native soil had significantly lower BRD than the USGA soil
(Tables 3 and 4). Rolling consistently showed significant increased ball roll
distance throughout both years of the study (Tables 3 and 4). This increased
BRD of rolled putting greens have been reported in previous studies (Hamilton et

al, 1994, Nikolai et. al., 1997).

Differences between PGR’s were present from 7 to 16 days after
treatment (DAT) except for application #2 in 1996 where no differences were
apparent between PGR’s (Tables 3 and 4). 28 days after treatment of
application #2 and 20 DAT of application #3 in 1997 showed that flurprimidol had
significantly lower BRD than the check plots. A rebound effect has been
suggested in previous research where a flush of growth may occur after the

effects of the PGR have dimished (Calhoun, 1996).

Though interactions among all main effects were sporadic, ones of interest
and relevance are presented. In 1996 interactions occurred between rolling and
plant growth regulators (PGR) 6 to 12 days after treatment (DAT) of applications
#1 and #3. This interaction was also recorded 11DAT of application #1 of 1997
(Table 5). When rolling was applied, flurprimidol and trinexapac-ethyl were
significantly higher than the check while PGR’s did not have this effect in plots
that were not rolled. This interaction may indicate a potential benefit for
superintendents looking to improve putting green speed without lowering mowing

heights.

12

mod u a i 226:... 238.28.» 93 .26. a 3:9.» .2. 2.8:. E2562. 623.8 :26 55.2. ..
285.55 .62 u wz $62888. mod .66 v a 6 00:858.. 60.6.3.» 8.2.8 .. ..:

 

 

 

 

 

 

i OZ i i OZ i i OZ i i OZ i ... i OZ i i OZ i i OZ i i O2 i . OZ i i O2 i i OZ . i OZ i i OZ i i OZ i .. ... ... “00:00:76“
ONO ONO «NO VNO A? «O VOO OOO O «O OOO OON WOO OOO VON OOO OON SON DOVN DOVN x0050
ONO ONO «NO ONO GONO NOO NOO O «O NO 3O «VO OOO OON NON ONN DNOON ONON HNON 325.593....

«NO NOO ONO ONO nuN «O. OOO 8O O «O OO NCO OOO NOO «ON OOO NON uOON nNON DOON $50.03flxc5fi.
10m

1 “2 o co . coo ace a: co. coo 0 W2 1 i wz i .- m2 .- a: i ”Z i i ”Z .. coo so 1 $2 a one ea. 00:35:?”
v «O ONO « «O O «O OOO OON VON OON NOO NON ONO OON OON NON VNN OON OVN 8N 03.0. «02
ONO OOO OOO OOO ONO V «O NNO NOO OVO OOO OVO ONO OON « «O OON 8O NON OON 8:0”.

w«5.0m

.OZi .. .. iOZi iOZi iOZ- .. iOZi iOZi iOZ. iOZi .OZi iOZi iOZi iOZi iOZ. iOZi iOZi «wocuoECQO
O «O aNNO a: «O «OO v «O OOO DNOO « «O OVO «CO NVO OON NON OOO OON VON OVN OON o>=w2
N «O eNO on «NO NO N «O OOO DNOO O «O NOO OON OOO OOO 8N OON ONN «ON OVN OON O «no «.8
ONO 0 «VO GONO ONO ONO OOO 8 «O O «O OO #8 OOO OOO NON 8O «ON OON OON OON (GOD

.«.(O NO P<DON ._.<OON P<OO« P<O «« F<OO« P<OONP<D O«P<O N« N<OO ._.(OO P<OO P<O VN .—.<O N« P<OV« ._.<O N« ._.<OO« P<ON o._>.P=OO
«Oi co:oo=&<v O13<i «O «NO co..no=&<v .378 3* c£~§EQ<V :33«
30.02.55

 

 

.89 .3 .32... an. .950 6.8.9. 899.3 .82.:
.5 .- 23.... use... 8 2.65.88 s 85.... =2 .3 8 $0... 9.3.... .935 2.... .8. 9...... .85 8.6.528 .6 98... 5.2 .n .3.»

13

mod n a .u .563... 22853.6 oi 6.5. a auto...» .0... 3qu .coE.uo.. .cE:.oo coco £55) .«
28555 .62 i mz 59688. 88 .5... v a .. 858%.... .83.... 8.8... ..

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 W2 1 i ”Z i i wz i a ”Z i a: co co. co 0 wz i co co so I wz i i ”Z o co ea c: :- «8:85:th
VNO NOO NNO NOO UOON SNN DOOO nuOOO OON nONO DOOO n «OO «OO 8O QNNO nO «O n“ONO nNON x850
ONO NOO N «O NO GOOO 6 «ON nONO DOOO VON GNVO QONO UOVO NOO NOO OOOO uNNO uOOO nOON _OU_E_._93E

«NO VVO O «O OOO QOON ONNN NVOO NVVO NON n“NOO nuN «O 6 «VO OOO «OO nONO n.NONO DVNO MOOO _>50ioauxoc_.._.
101
CC. CC. 0 ”Z 8 CC CC. CCC CCC CCC CCC . wz . CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CC CCC CCC §~0:_ca_w
N «O «OO O«O VOO ONN OON O «O ONO ONN «OO OON ONO NON OON O «O O «O O «O VON 30:0. ~02
OOO OVO ONO 3O O «O OON OOO OOO NOO OOO OOO NOO OOO O «O OO ONO OOO O «O 3.01
94......
iOZi iOZi ... iOZi iOZi iOZi iOZi -OZi iOZi iOZi iOZi -OZ- iOZi iOZi iOZi iOZi iOZi .. «Ouagbcmmw
O «O NOO av «O «O 8N VNN ONO OOO NON ONO N «O OOO OON NOO NNO O «O ONO nOON 9502
ONO NVO av «O OOO OON OON OOO OOO NON OO O «O OOO «OO NOO ONO VNO NOO n.OON O «O «.OO
OOO OOO CNNO NVO VON «ON «O OO VON OVO VNO OVO VOO « «O OOO ONO ONO uOOO (0O:
P<O OO P<D NN N<O ON P(Q O« P<D O« ._.(D «« ._.<D ON N<D ON N<D O« h<0 V« N<O O« «(D N N<O OO «<0 ON P<D «N N<O O« «(O «« .P<O N KPH zow

9. 8.8.395; .9 c8885 .33. A 2 8.8.3.4.. 9.2.8

8.62.8

 

R8. .2 .82.... a... .950 88.... Batch .88.:
o... a 28... use... no 29.5.8 c. 8.9.... =2 .8 8 $9.. 6.6.32 532.. a... 8. 9...... .8... 562.88 a 38.... 5.: .v .3.»

14

Table 5. Rolling by plant growth regulator (PGR) means on ball roll distance in
centimeters on puttirmreens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center.

 

1996 1997
7 DAT 1 DAT 11 DAT 11 DAT
RolledfTrinexapac-ethyl 274a 309a 332a 339a
Rolled/Flurprimidol 274a 300b 334a 329ab
Rolled/check 255b 290C 317b 329ab
Not Rolled/Trinexapac-ethyl 2330 266d 3030 332ab
Not Rolled! Flurprimidol 249b 270d 311bc 318b
Not rolled/check 237C 269d 31 1 be 324ab
_§ilgnificancet “‘ “" ”‘ ”

 

”fl "' denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively
1 Within each column, treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05

Table 6. Soil by plant growth regulator (PGR) means for PGR treatments on bail roll
distance in centimeters on puttinggreens at the Hancock Turfggss Research Center, 1997.

g7-Aug
USGA! Trinexapac-ethyl 294bcd
USGA! Flurprimidol 312a
USGA/check 278e
80:10: 10/ Trinexapac-ethyl 289cef
80:10:10] Flurprimidol 301abd
80:10:10/Check 290bcde
Native! Trinexapac-ethyl 297abcd
Native! Flurprimidol 303abc
Native/check 288def
fiLnificancet “

 

" denotes statistical significance at P < 0.05
1’ Within each column, treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05

Table 7. Soil by roll means on ball roll distance in centimeters on
puttinureens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center.

 

M 11-Jul 22-Seg
USGA/roll 302bc 357ab 343a
USGA/not rolled 305ab 330cd 322bc
80:10:10/rolled 313a 358a 330ab
80:10:10/not rolled 290d 313a 310c
Native/rolled 300bc 342bc 317bc
Native/not rolled 296cd 325de 318bc
Significancet *“ "’ “

 

“fl “ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively
T Within each column, treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05

15

A soil-by-PGR interaction was observed 13DAT of application #3 in 1997
(Table 6). Flurprimidol showed significantly higher BRD than trinexapac—ethyl and
check plots on USGA and 80:10:10 greens. Being that this was the only
significant interaction between soil and PGR, superintendents can be confident in

using PGR’s will not cause different effects in different soils.

Soil-by-roll interactions were observed on three dates in 1997 (Table 7).
On 2-Jul the 80:10:10 soil produced higher BRD when rolled while the USGA and
Native soils did not show this effect. On 11-Jul and 22-Sep, both the USGA and
80:10:10 soils produced significantly higher BRD when rolled than the native
greens. This interaction was not observed in 1996. These interactions indicate
that high sand content root zones may produce higher BRD when rolling is

applied while native soil greens do not produce higher BRD.

Color

Significant treatment effects on putting green color ratings are shown in
Table 8. No differences in color were recorded between soil types in 1996. though
differences were observed in 1997 (Table 9). At the beginning of the 1997
season on 4-Jun the native greens had significantly darker color than the USGA
and 80:10:10 greens. At the end of the season, on 23 Aug and 5 Sep, the USGA
greens showed higher color ratings than the native and 80:10:10 greens. As was
observed by Hartwiger (1996), rolling consistently produced decreased turfgrass
color though both years of the study (Table 9). When differences in color were

apparent between PGR’s, flurprimidol caused lower color ratings below that of

16

23.8%.: 8... .3... v m .a 0885...... song...» 8.2.8 ..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8... ..N... 8... Na... 8.. 8... a... B... 3... >0
..N... E... t... 2 ... 8... 5... ..N... .N... «N .o. .05
N..... :... 8... ..N... N..... .N... ..N... 2... v n. x m x m

z N..... .3 ..N... 8... 2... 8... No... 8... N n. x m
..N... 8... 8... 8... 3... E... B... N... v n. x m
.2. ..N... 2.. NE ..N... .: 9; .2. .3 z. ..N.... 2.. BN. .2. a... N a .mon.
8... SN 8.. 2.... m: ..N... on... R... m. 3. .2...
IN EN 2... 9... 8... N..... ..N... S... N m x w
.. 8.8 5.2 8N N..... ..N... :. New 2... .. 9N . m .3.
no... 3.... RN N... ..NN an... 8... 3... v .a. 35.
one i 3.... SN 8... ..N... oo... 8... ..N... N m ._...m
..N 8... EN No... 8... . 2... 2... 2... N S..8..%m
to £2.35) *0 ooSoO

New-.. Iung 3..-; .2.-NN 378 5..-... 3..-... 5...:

a...

m . N 3.. ..N... ..o. z 2. : 8.... 8... 8... 8... 3... >0
NN... 9... 8... 3.... B... ..N... .. .... ..N... N. ... ..N .o. .95
2... 3.... 8... 8... 8... 8... E... 2.... 8... v n. x m x m
8... 8... S... ..N... 3... 3... 8... 2.... 8... N n. x a
3... . mm... . t... ..N... ..m... R... 8... B... 2... v n. x m

2.. t... z. t... .2. 3.... .: m2 .: a; :. 3N ..N... .: 8... :. ..N... N 9. .mon.
..N... 8... No... NN... 2.... 8... 2.... 8... ..N... o 3. .em.
2... 8... t... 2... t... 8... B... ..m... ..N... N m x m
EN EN 3... N... t... 2.... z 8... ..N... .. 2.... . m .3.
3... S... a... 8... ..N... ..m... N..... on... R... v .a. 35
..N... a... 8... c... 8.. 8... 8... 8... N..... N m .8
..N... 8.. 8... No... 8.. a... 2.... 9.... EN N 8.8.8".

.U coward) *0 00.5.5
3...... .2... SEN 5..-... 2...... 5...... 3.0:... com... BEN
m8. 8...

 

.2 6:35.. .nam 5.50 $2.30". $29.3 ..ooocaI o... .a «:85 32.... co 3:32 .28 co 800:0 £2.52... .0 8:855.» 96.. «Susan zoos. .o 03a»

17

Table 9. Effects of construction type, rolling, plant growth regulator (PGR) treatments on
color ratings on putting_greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. East LansingI Ml

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1996 1997
App. #1 (28-May)
Soil Type 29-Jul 10—Sep 18-Sep 3-Jun 4-Jun 19-Jun 25-Jun
USGA 6.7 7 6.6 5.9 5.8 6.2 7.7
80:10:10 6.9 7.1 6.6 6.1 6.1 6.1 7.8
Native 7.1 7.1 7 6.3 6:4 6.7 7.6
Significance? -NS- -NS- -NS- -NS--NS- -NS- -NS-
Rolling
Rolled 6.6 7 6.5 6.1 6.1 6.4 7.7
Not rolled 7.2 7.1 7 6.1 6.2 6.3 7.7
Significance ” -NS- " -NS- -NS- -NS- -NS-
Plant Growth Regiator
Trinexapac-ethyl 7.2a 7.7a 7.1a 6.3a 6.4a 6.5a 7.8a
Flurprimidol 6.2b 6.5c 6.1b 5.4b 5.3b 5.8b 7.5b
Check 7.3a 7.0b 7.0a 6.6a 6.7a 6.7a 7.8a
SignificanceT .. "" ”" .. ”" ”" m
1997
Amp. #2 (4-Jul) App. #3 (14-Aug)
Soil Lype 7-.Jul 10-Jul 11-Jul 13.Jul 14-Jul 20-Jul 23-Aug 5-Sep
USGA 6.8 6.8 6.5 6.6 6.3 6.2 6.9a 6.6
80:10:10 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.7 6.6 6.5 5% 5.6
Native 7 6.5 6.8 7 6.7 7.1 5.4b 6.1
Significance’ -NS- -NS- -NS- -NS--NS--NS- r“ -NS-
Rolling
Rolled 6.6 6.4 6.4 6.6 6.2 6.5 5.5 5.4
Not rolled 7 6.9 6.8 6.9 6.9 6.7 6.6 6.9
Significance - NS - - NS - “ - NS - m - NS - - NS - “
Plant Growth Regulator
Trinexapac-ethyl 7.0a 6.8a 6.8a 7.1a 6.8b 6.9a 6.6a 6.5a
Flurprimidol 6.2b 6.0b 5.9b 5.8b 5.5c 6.0b 4.9b 5.7b
Check 7.2a 7.1a 7.1a 7.4a 7.33 7.0a 6.7a 6.3a
ganificance? m m m m m m m m

 

”‘2 *" denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively; NS = Not Significant
1 Within each column. treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05
1 Color was evaluated on a 1-9 scale, 1=brownldead turf and 9=dark green

18

the trinexapac-ethyl and check plots. Trinexapac-ethyl did not adversely affect

color.

The only significant interaction recorded during both years of the study
was between rolling and PGR’s (Table 10). 22 DAT of application #3 of 1997 a
roll-by-plant growth regulator interaction occurred. When not rolled, trinexapac-
ethyl treated plots had significantly higher color than all other plots and rolled

flurprimidol plots had significantly lower color than all other plots.

Quality

Significant treatment effects on putting green quality ratings are shown in
Table 11. Quality ratings were taken when visual differences were apparent,
therefore two ratings were taken each year. No quality differences were
recorded among the three soil types during either year of the study (Table 12).
Rolling did not show differences in quality except for 3-Jun 1997 where rolled
plots had higher quality than not rolled plots. Due to color being a major
influence in the determination of quality, results in PGR quality ratings reflect the
results that were observed in color ratings on the same dates. Flurprimidol
significantly decreased quality ratings below trinexapac-ethyl and check plots.

Two interactions regarding quality were recorded. A soil-by-roll interaction
was recorded on 10-Sep—96 (Table 13). When rolling was applied, no significant
differences were detected between soil types while the USGA plots had
significantly lower quality when rolling was not applied. A soil-by-PGR interaction

was recorded on 3 Jun 1997 (Table 13). No significant differences were shown

19

Table 10. Roll by plant growth regulator interaction for color ratings on
puttinggeens at the Hancock TurLgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI 1997. *

 

S-Sep
Rolled/frinexapac-ethyl 5.6 b
Rolled/Flurprimidol 4.8 c
Rolled/check 5.8 b
Not Rolledl'l'rinexapac-ethyl 7.4 a
Not Rolled/ Flurprimidol 6.5 b
Not rolled/check 6.7 b

it

_S_imificancet
“ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.05

1' Treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05
1: Color was evaluated on a 1-9 scale, 1=brownldead turf and 9=dark green

20

Table 11. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects on quality ratings on putting
geens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, Ml.

 

 

 

 

 

Quality
1996 1997

29-Jul 1 O-Seg 3—Jun 7-Jul
Source of Variation df
Repfication 2 0.13 0.02 1 .03 0.02
Sci, 8 2 0.96 1.19 2.20 0.48
Error (a) 4 0.83 121 2.24 0.20
Roll, R 1 1.04 0.07 2.04 0.02
S x R 2 0.06 2.25 m 1.10 0.09
Error (b) 6 0.47 0.19 0.41 0.34
PGR, P 2 1.35 m 2.07 '“ 1.20 *“ 0.37 “"
S x P 4 0.18 0.35 0.70 m 0.07
R x P 2 0.00 0.07 0.26 0.09
SxRx P 4 0.12 0.05 . 0.19 0.09
Error (c) 24 0.14 0.30 0.15 0.06
CV (%) 5.30 7.90 6.32 3.55

 

m denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01

21

Table 12. Effects of construction type, rolling, plant growth regulator (PGR) treatments on quality
raflgs on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansigg, MI. 2;

 

 

 

 

 

1996 1 997
303 Type 29-Jul 10-Sep 3—Jun 7-Jul
USGA 6.7 6.6 5.7 7.0
80:10:10 7.0 7.0 6.0 6.7
Native 7.1 7.1 6.4 7.0
Significance - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS -
Rolling
rolled 6.8 6.9 6.2 6.9
Not rolled 7.1 6.9 5.9 6.9
Significance - NS - - NS - “ - NS -
PGR
Trinexapac-ethyl 7.1 a 7.3a 6.2a 6 .9a
Flurprimidol 6.6b 6.6b 5.8b 6.8b
chec'k 7.1 a 6.8b 6.2a 7.0a
Si @ificanceT .0. fit. it. it.

 

m, “ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively; NS = Not Significant
1' Within each column, treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05
1: Color was evaluated on a 1-9 scale, 1=brownldead turf and 9=dark green

22

coma {ovum van .5. 33.555". 6.8.». m. a .8 822.35 mm; .200 H

mod n a .a 2.205.. 22.3533 8m 3:2 a @555... .0: mean... 2.053.. .26. some $923 ..cm ..ano some :E._>> ._.
E... v n. .m 8:855? 33.3.2». 3.2.0.. 2...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$88555 .oocmoscgw
33.8 8...... 388 2.....2 «N. as... 2,82
an... 8...... 84... 2...”... «N. 88... 2......
238 3.... 38.... <9... ..N... a... <8:
.85 325.52. 353822... 2.... .8 33¢ 32 8:3. 2.... :8
3-52.. 8-8%...
5.0225 mom..n-__om 8.8.2...
__e...._-__om

 

H .=2 $52.3 33 5.50 genomom
329...... .085... o... .a 9.3.5 9.5.... .8 32.022... «09348... new =o._.>n..__ou 235.53 a... .o. 35.2 >525 .3 gas...

23

between PGR’s in the native soil plots while flurprimidol caused lower quality in

the USGA and 80:10:10 plots.
Root Weight

Significant treatment effects for both years of the study are shown in Table
14. The main effect of soil type produced only one significant difference in 1996
and none in 1997. USGA soils showed the greatest root weight in the 0-15cm
sampling depth in 1996(Table 15). Rolling did not cause a difference in root
weight for either year of the study. Trinexapac-ethyl produced more roots than
flurprimidol at the 5-10cm depth. As shown in Table 14, no significant main

effects or interactions were recorded in 1997.

Despite the lack of differences between main effects there were several
significant interactions in 1996. A soil-by-roll interaction was recorded at the O-
2.5cm depth where the 80:10:10 soil types produced significantly higher root

weights when rolling was applied (Table 16).

The 5-10cm sampling depth produced three significant interactions in
1996. A soil-by-PGR interaction (Table 17) showed that within the 80:10:10 plots
trinexapac-ethyl produced more roots than the flurprimidol and check plots. Both
the USGA and native soils exhibited no differences in root mass between PGR's.
A roll-by-PGR interaction was also recorded at the 5-10cm depth in 1996 (Table
18). When rolling was applied, trinexapac—ethyl produced more roots than both
the flurprimidol and check plots. In the not-rolled plots there were no differences

in root weights between PGR’s.

24

Table 14. Mean squares and significance of treatments on root mass on putting greens at the
Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansigq, MI.

 

 

 

 

 

1 996

........................................ depth

0-2.5cm 2.5-5cm 5-10cm 1 0-15cm 0-1§cm
Source of Variation df
Replication 2 0.05000 0.00400 0.00200 0.001 00 0.10800
Soil, S 2 0.01000 0.00200 0.01000 0.00700 0.06900 “‘
Error (a) 4 0.00700 0.00100 0.00600 0.00200 0.00300
Roll, R 1 0.03000 0.00010 0.00070 0.00300 0.00300
S x R 2 0.04000 “ 0.00100 0.00010 0.00100 0.03600
Error (b) 6 0.00500 0.00040 0.00090 0.00200 0.00900
PGR, P 2 0.00400 0.00100 0.00400 “ 0.00200 0.01500
S x P 4 0.00500 0.00100 0.00400 ‘“ 0.00070 0.00600
R x P 2 0.00050 0.00010 0.00400 " 0.00020 0.00020
S x R x P 4 0.00400 0.00300 “ 0.00500 “"’ 0.00020 0.00400
Error (c) 24 0.00600 0.00080 0.00080 0.00100 0.00500
CV (%) 27.1 33.2 38.9 194.4 15.6

1 997

........................................ depth

0-2.5cm 2.5-50m 5-10cm 1 0-150m 0-15cm
Source of Variation df
Replication 2 0.00070 0.00210 0.00040 0.00020 0.00100
Soil. S 2 0.00340 0.00360 0.00040 0.00040 0.01400
Error (a) 4 0.00510 0.00130 0.00010 0.00006 0.01200
Roll, R 1 0.00030 0.00320 0.00010 0.00007 0.00009
S x R 2 0.00840 0.00230 0.00020 0.00030 0.00300
Error (b) 6 0.00190 0.00190 0.00030 0.00008 0.00500
PGR, P 2 0.001 10 0.00070 0.00000 0.00020 0.00200
8 x P 4 0.00370 0.00110 0.00020 0.00006 0.00500
R x P 2 0.00420 0.00190 0.00010 0.00006 0.00800
S x R x P 4 0.00240 0.00110 0.00020 0.00010 0.00200
Error (0) 24 0.00200 0.00160 0.00020 0.00007 0.00300
CV (°/o) 31.3 83.2 46.6 71 .8 25.7

 

m, ” denotes statistical significance at at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively

25

Table 15. Effects of construction type, rolling. plant growth (PGR) regulator treatments of 19
on root weights in grams on puttinggreens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center.

 

 

 

gmmymm3
§oil Tyg 0-2.5cm 2.5—5cm 5-100m 10-15cm 0-150m
USGA 3.7 1.2 2.5 1.0 19.5a
80:10:10 3.1 1.0 1.7 0.5 15.1b
Native 3.6 1.0 1.2 0.0 16.5b
significancet - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS - m
mm
Rolled 3.7 1.1 1.7 0.2 17.3
Not rolled 3.2 1.1 ‘ 2.0 0.7 16.9
Significance - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS -
EB
Trinexapac-ethyl 3.6 1 .1 2.2a 0.7 18.4
Flurprimidol 3.4 1.0 1.5b 0.2 16.5
Check 3.3 1.1 1.7ab 0.5 16.5
Significance" - NS - - NS - ~ - NS - - NS -

 

m, " denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively; NS = Not Significant
1' Within each column, treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0

Table 16. Soil by rolling interaction for root weights (grams/mm’) on putting greens at the Ha
Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

 

 

 

1996
0—2.Scm depth
Soil type Rolled Not Rolled
USGA 4.0a 3.3ab
80:10:10 3.8a 2.3b
Native 3.3ab 3.9a
finificance’ “

 

*‘ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.05
1' Within each column and between each row, treatment means not sharing a letter are
significantly different at a = 0.05

26

Table 17. Soil by plant growth regulator interaction for root weights from 5.0-10.0cm depth
on putting greens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI, 1996.

 

 

__grams/mm3

5.0-10cm depth
USGA! trinexapac-ethyl 2.5ab
USGA! flurprimidol 2.Sab
USGA/check 2.5ab
80:10:10! trinexapac-ethyl 2.9a
80:10:10/ flurprimidol 0.7c
80:10:10/Check 1.7bc
Native! trinexapac-ethyl 1.2bc
Native/ flurprimidol 1.2bc
Native/check 1 .2bc
Significance? ‘*"

 

"" denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01
1' Treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05

Table 18. Roll by plant growth regulator interaction for root weights (grams) from 5.0-10.0cm
depth on putting_greens at the Hancock Tuggrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI, 1996.

 

 

gmmymm

5.0-10.0cm depth
Rolled/1' n'nexapac-ethyl 2.5a
Rolled/Flurprimidol 1 .Oc
Rolled/check 1 .7bc
Not Rolled/1' n'nexapac-ethyl 2.0ab
Not Rolled/ Flurprimidol 2.0ab
Not rolled/check 2.0ab
giggificance" *"

 

"* denotes statistical significance at P < 0.05
1’ Treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05

27

Table 19. Soil by roll by plant growth regulator interaction for root weights (grams/mm?) from
aneens at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East LansinfiMl, 1996.

 

 

 

depth
2.5-5.0cm 5.0-10.0cm

USGA lrolledltrinexapac-ethyl 1.23 a 2.45 abc
USGA [rolled/flurprimidol 123 a 2.45 abc
USGA [rolled/check 1.23 a 2.45 abc
USGA Inot rolled/tinexapac-ethyl 1.23 a 2.45 abc
USGA/not rolled/flurprimidol 1.23 a 2.45 abc
USGA lnot rolled/check 123 a 2.45 abc
80:10:10/rolledltrinexapac-ethyl 1.23 a 3.19 a
80:10:10/rolledlfiurprimidol 1.23 a 0.74 cd
80:10:10/rolled/check 0.86 ab 0.74 cd
80:10:10/not rolled/‘trinexapac-ethyl 1.23 a 2.45 ab
80:10:10/not rolled/flurprimidol 0.37 b 0.74 cd
80:10:10/not rolled/check 0.86 ab 2.45 ab
Native/rolled/trinexapac-ethyl 1.23 a 1.72 abc
Native/rolled/flurprimidol 0.37 b 0.00 d
Native/rolled/check 1.23 a 1.72 abc
Native/not rolled/trinexapac-ethyl 0.86 ab 0.74 bd
Native/not rolled/flurprimidol 1.23 a 2.45 ac
Native/not rolled/check 1.23 a 0.74 bd

SignificanceT
”‘, “ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05
1' Within each column, treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05

28

The final interaction at the 5-10cm sampling depth was between soil,
rolling and PGR’s (Table 19). This three-way interaction showed that the USGA
soil had no differences in root weight regardless of rolling or PGR applications. In
the native greens, flurprimidol produced significantly fewer roots in both rolled
and not rolled plots when compared to the 80:10:10 and USGA root zones. In the
80:10:10 soil, flurprimidol produced significantly fewer roots than trinexapac-ethyl
in both rolled and not-rolled plots. There was also a three-way interaction at the
0-2.5cm sampling depth. This interaction was also influenced by the application
of flurprimidol. In the USGA soil there were no differences among PGR or rolling
treatments. In the 80:10:10 soil, flurprimidol treatments produced significantly
less roots in the not-rolled plots. In the native soil the response was reversed.

Flurprimidol produced significantly fewer roots when rolled.

Also worth noting is the potential for error in the collection of data for root
weights. This may explain the lack of differences shown in 1997. Skogley and
Sawyer (1992) noted the potential for loss of roots due to the laborious task of

separating roots from soil.

Turfgrass responses

Other information regarding turfgrass responses were recorded on a
periodic basis. Significant treatment effects for dollar spot (Sclerotinia
homeocama) counts, clipping weights, microdochium patch (Microdochium
M) counts, and cutworm damage counts are presented in Table 20. Yellow

tuft (Scleropthera macrospora) incidence showed no significant differences and

29

202.8%... no... .3... v o. ... 3:858... 32.2.8... 8.2.0.. .. ...:

30

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.. ....N ...... ...... m... ...N.N 3.... ...... 5
.....N Na... .... a... ...... N... ...... ..N a. ...:m
.... 3N .... n. N... .... m... .. ..x ....w
... .N Nam o... N... ...... E o... N a x m
o... .... .... .... in ..N ....N v n. x m
a... ....N .. N... N... ....N . .... 3N N n. .5.
...m... N8. .... m... an: ...o mam o .... 35
....N ...mNN .. I. n. N...Nm : a... .. 3.... N m x m

.. Ne... ..NN .. .... o... NN...: .. ...m _ .... 2.5. . m ......
.....m. N...N... a... ..N SN. 0N. ...... v are...
3.8 .3... .. .... ... ...... ...8 .... ....8. N m .....m
3.... ......m ...N .... . $8 2... N... N 8.8.8..

5.3.... 3-575 89...... SEEN 89$ 8-523 ... 5.8.; ... 8.3m
82.8 5.2.50 6.2. a... .2. c __o .86 5.8
532008.22

 

 

...2 define. .8m .6280 .....aonom 38%.. .68ch o... .o acoflqucusa ..o
8.58 325.. 6.95.3 use 8.58 :83 52:02.20? £299... 9.32... .858 .2.» 3...... .2 85.53.. .2855.» ...... 8.2.3 coo—2 .8 can...

mod n a .m 2.28.... >_.c8_._c6_m 2m .98. m 656.... .o... mcmoE .coE.mo.. ......28 some ..E._>> ..
28.85 .02 u .02 3.9.8.8. 8... .....o v a .... 852.8...- _8_.m_.m.m 8.2% ..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.. $2 a as a $2 3 u m7— : ...0UCNOECm_m
o.m mmoN mm... mm. v.88
mN ...... 3.... ...... 8.552...
...N 98.. NN... 0... 3532.22...

«On.

.. .. .. 852.com
md Now. 3.... mad 8:0. .02
0.. em... mud mod 8:01
69:3.

o $2 a cc a m2 0 cc... #00C8_u_20_m
..N mvnd o numd 9.62
..N .60... o no... ototom
9m own... no... «..N...... (Ow:

862-m 8-3..-.N 8-9.2.6 06-5.7.6 on... :5
N2.320.. , £86 NEanm
mumEmo E6530 m..6_m>>dc_aq=o .03 .960

 

 

8.80 5.88m «warn-F .68ch o... .m named-dazsq ..o 5ch .8. ....m .6958 E0350
0 .08 .26.. ..o m...oE.8.. 6.260.. 5306 .56 6:50. .8... 8.82.38 .0 38.6 Ems. ..N 03m...

31

therefore will not be discussed. USGA soils had significantly more dollar spots on
24 Jun 1996 than the 80:10:10 and native soil plots (Table 21). Rolling produced
significantly less dollar spots than not-rolled plots during all data collection dates.
PGR’s did not effect dollar spot incidence. In 1996 two soil-by-roll interactions
occurred (Table 22). On both 24-Jun and 2-Aug rolling significantly reduced
dollar spot incidence on USGA plots. On 24-Jun the 80:10:10 soil also showed
significantly less dollar spot incidence when rolling was applied. The reduction of
dollar spot as-a result of rolling has been shown in previous research (Nikolai et.
al., 1997) and suggests a substantial benefit to superintendents looking to reduce

dollar spot incidence on sand-based putting greens.

Main effects produced no differences in clipping weights on 8-Aug-96
(Table 20). On 21-Jul-97 the main effects of soil type and rolling showed
significant differences in clipping weights but will not be discussed because a
soil-by-roll interaction was also observed. Clipping weights showed a soil-by-roll
interaction (Table 22) where the sand-based plots had no differences between
rolled and not-rolled plots while the native soil produced more clippings when

rolling was applied.

There was also a roll-by-PGR interaction for clipping weights (Table 23).
When rolling was applied, the check plots produced significantly more clippings
than both trinexapac-ethyl and flurprimidol. No differences were recorded when

PGR’s were applied to not-rolled plots.

As shown in Table 20, no differences were recorded in microdochium

patch incidence from 14-Apr-97. Cutworm damage counts showed that rolling

32

Table 22. Soil by roll interaction means for dollar spot counts and clipping weights on putting greens
at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing MI.

 

Clipping weight

 

 

 

Dollar spot interactions interaction
dollar spots/m2 J " m'2 * (1‘1
24-Jun-96 2-Aug96 21-Jul-97
USGA/roll 1.63 c 0.66 b 1.41 c
USGA/not rolled 6.02 a 1.08 a 1.29 c
80:10:10/rolled 0.09 c 0.00 ab 1.66 c
80:10:10/not rolled 1.93 b 0.07 ab 1.73 c
Native/rolled 0.09 be 0.07 ab 2.99 a
Native/not rolled 0.37 bc 0.00 ab 2.49 b
_S_ignificancet “ "" *"

 

“ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.05
1' Within each column, treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05

Table 23. Roll by plant growth regulator interaction for clipping weights at the Hancock Turfgrass Res
Center, East Lansing, MI, 21-July, 1997.

Clippigq Weights

 

 

_(g " m-2 ’ d-1)
Rolled/Trinexapac—ethyl 1 .8b
Rolled/Flurprimidol 1 .9b
Rolled/check 2.4a
Not Rolled/1' rinexapac-ethyl 1.9b
Not Rolled! Flurprimidol 1.7b
Not rolled/check 1.8b
figfificanceT ...

 

'“ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01
1' Treatment means not sharing a letter are significantty different at a = 0.05

33

resulted in significantly less damage than not-rolled plots (Table 21).

Soil Responses

Thatch weights, root length, and Clegg impact absorption (Gmax) values
were also recorded. Mean squares for significant treatment effects are
presented in Table 24. Thatch weight and root length data produced no
interactions or main effect significance and therefore will not be discussed.
Clegg impact absorption values produced significant differences between the
main effects of rolling and soil types. A soil-by-roll interaction was recorded for
Clegg impact absorption on 23-Jun-97 (Table 25). When rolling was applied, the
native soil produced a significantly higher Gm than the sand-based plots. There
were no differences in Gm values between soil types when rolling was not

applied.
Conclusions

When significant differences in BRD between soil types were recorded,
which was five times through both seasons, the native soil had less BRD than the
other soil types. A connection can be attributed to clipping yields. On one date
when clipping weights were recorded, the native soil showed significantly greater
clippings than the sand-based soils. The lower BRD measurements in the native
soil may be attributed to the increased shoot growth. As has been shown in other
research, (Hamilton et al, 1994, Nikolai et. al., 1997) rolling consistently

increased BRD through both seasons. Regarding the effects of PGR’s on

34

262.033.. mod .36 v m an 8:35:96 .3332... «20:2. .... ...:

 

 

 

 

 

em: 3 2: as >0
3% I. o... N Q 35
No.3 o. N 3 v n. x m x m
35 3. N; N a x m
”.88 on am e a x m
N28 3; od N a .mon_
«.23 no. 3 6 av sew
ex: 3.2 02 N m x w
N82. can: No F m .__om
3&2. e8 ..N e E Sew
$39 .. QB... no», N m ...om

.. 58$ 3 N N cassava
as; SEN .52: a co_§a> .0 858

532 .8. lama am; :29:

 

.82 ..s. 93:... saw

.550 5.33m 329.5... 58ch 05 .a «coma 9.52. :0 5:90.33 xaon can Eyes :29: 6.65265 53:0. .08
.358 035% 8623 .3592: 9.39.0 .358 .3» i=8 .8 3:253... 20 3:35.56 ucu moans... memo—2 .vu 032.

35

Table 25. Soil by roll interactions for peak deceleration (Gm) on putting greens

at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, 1997.
Peak deceleration

 

 

 

interaction
23-Jun
Grnax
Soil Tyg Rolled Not Rolled
USGA 73.8bc 66.7d
80:10:10 76.6b 68.4cd
Native 90.7a 71 .7bcd
Sgg' nificance "‘

 

*“ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01
1' Within each column and between each row, treatment means not sharing a letter are
significantly different at a = 0.05

36

BRD through both seasons. Regarding the effects of PGR’s on rolling,
differences appeared in the window of 7 to 16 days after application except for
the second application in 1996. When these differences were recorded, the
check plot had less BRD than either trinexapac-ethyl or flurprimidol or both,
though one PGR in particular was not consistently greater than the check A
connection can be made to clipping weights for PGR applications as well. On 21-
.lul-97 clipping weights in the check plots were significantly greater than both

PGR’s which would account for the lower BRD in the check plots.

There were six PGR applications made during the study (three each year).
Of those six, four showed a roll-by-PGR interaction between 6 and 12 DAT. Both
PGR’s had significantly higher BRD than check plots when rolling was applied.
This result may provide a valuable alternative for superintendents looking to

improve putting green speeds without reducing mowing heights.

The most important findings with regard to color and quality ratings were
the effects from PGR’s. When color differences became apparent after the PGR
applications, flurprimidol consistently reduced both color and quality below that of
trinexapac-ethyl and the check. Rolling periodically had an adverse effect on

color though no reduction in quality resulted.

Dollar spot incidence was reduced when rolling was applied to USGA soils for
both data collections in 1996. Though this was not seen in 1997, Nikolai et. al.
(1997) showed the reduction of dollar spot from rolling as well. This shows that
rolling can be an asset to superintendents for not only increasing putting green

speeds, but also reducing dollar spot incidence.

37

Nikolai and Karcher (1999) found that when putting green speeds are high
(above 270cm BRD), most golfers are not able to detect differences in putting
green speeds that differ by 30cm. Though statistically significant differences
involving PGR’s were recorded in this study, the increased BRD averaged 10cm.
This implies that though increases were recorded, they would not be detectable

by the golfer.

Since the inception of the study in 1996 the use of PGR’s by
superintendents on putting greens has changed. When the study began, PGR’s
’ were not labeled for putting green use and few superintendents were using them.
There are many superintendents who now apply PGR’s to their putting greens on
a weekly basis throughout the growing season (Rogers, Vargas, and Crum,
1999). Since the window of effect from the PGR’s is one to two weeks after
application, this has become a more useful practice than the methods used in
this study. Future projects may benefit from examining the practice of weekly

applications that produce a more consistent reduction in growth.

38

Chapter 2

The Effects Of Topdressing With Crumb Rubber On Creeping Bentgrass Quality
On Putting Greens Collars Constructed With Three Different Soil Types

M Materials gag Methods

There were four topdressing treatments applied to the putting green collars;
3.2mm crumb rubber, 9.6mm crumb rubber, 3.2mm crumb rubber mixed with
3.2mm sand, and sand alone. The particle size of the crumb rubber was
2.00/0.84mm. Particle size analysis of crumb rubber is shown in Table 50. In the
interest of reducing potential heat stress to the turfgrass plant from excessive
rubber on the surface, the rubber was applied at 1.6mm increments every week
starting 23-May-96. The final rate of 9.6mm crumb rubber was achieved on 24-
Jun-96, six weeks after the initial application and the point of data collection.
Both treatments containing sand received continual sand topdressing
applications through both years of the study. The collars were mowed three days
per week at 9.5mm. Traffic simulation was applied by making six passes five
days per week which was three times the rate applied to the putting greens. The
collars received more traffic to simulate the more intensively trafficked collar
areas that superintendents often have difficulty maintaining. All other
management practices are outlined in the general materials and methods

section.

39

quality were rated on a scale from 1-9; 1 = poor, 9 = excellent, and 6 =
acceptable.

Impact absorption was collected in June 1997 using the Clegg Impact Soil
Tester (Lafayette Instruments 00., Lafayette, IN) and the 2.25kg hammer. An
average of three measurements was recorded as transmitted to a hand-held
read—out box. The hammer was dropped randomly through the plot from a height
of 0.46m (Rogers and Waddington, 1990).

Shear resistance was recorded with the Eijkelkamp Shearvane Type 18
(Henderson, 1986). The values recorded (Nm) were an average of three
measurements.

Disease ratings were recorded when disease outbreaks occurred during
both years of the study. Diseases recorded were; dollar spot (Sclerotinia
homoeocarpa), microdochium patch (Microdochium g_i\_r_al_e_), and yellow tuft
(Scleropthera macrospora). Dollar spot and microdochium patch were recorded
according to the number of spots occurring in each plot. Yellow tuft was visually
rated on a scale from 0 - 100%.

Egg mg invasion ratings were recorded on 5-Oct-96, 16-Oct-96, 28-
May—97, and 10-Oct-97. Ratings were visually recorded on a scale from 0-100%.

Surface and soil temperatures (2.54cm depth) were recorded with a Bamant
115 Thermocouple Thermometer (Bamant Co., Barrington, IL) on 4-Jun-96 and
10-JuI-97 respectively. Three temperature measurements were taken randomly

for each treatment and averaged. A

40

Thatch depth was recorded on 16-Jun-96. Three samples were removed
from each plot, measured in millimeters, and then averaged. Thatch weight was
recorded on 16-Jun-97 (Skogely and Sawyer, 1992). Three samples were taken
from each plot. The area of the probe was 4.9cm. Verdure and soil were
removed from the sample and weighed. Samples were then ashed at 500°C for
five hours, reweighed and then averaged. Crumb rubber was present in the
thatch layer when measurements were taken and therefore may have affected

the results.

Results were analyzed using the SAS analysis of variance and least
significant difference (LSD) test for a 3-by-2-by-4 factorial experiment in a
randomized complete block split-split plot design with three replications. The four
topdressing treatments were split into the rolling treatments and the rolling

treatments were split into the three soil types.

Results and Discussion

Color

Mean squares and significant treatment effects are shown in Table 26 for
1996 and 1997. 'The 1996 season showed no differences in color among soil
types. On 14-Apr, the first color rating of the 1997 season, the 80:10:10 and
native soil plots had significantly darker green color than the USGA plots (Table
27). On 19-Jun-97 both of the sand based greens showed significantly darker

green color than the native soil. Rolling treatments showed inferior color to not-

41

rolled plots in both seasons. Topdressing with crumb rubber has proven effective
in improving the color of turfgrass stands (Rogers et al, 1998). In both of years of
the study, topdressing treatments with crumb rubber showed darker green color

than plots with no crumb rubber application (Table 27).

42

Table 26. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects for color ratings of putting
green collars at the Hancock Turfggss Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

 

 

 

 

 

 

1996
Source of Variation df 28-Jun 18-Jul 5-Sep 18-Sep 16-Oct
Replication 2 0.045 0.135 0.097 1 .399 2.931
Soil, S 2 0.045 0.010 0.056 0.181 0.337
Error (a ) 4 0.545 0.083 0.159 0.556 2.133
Roll, R 1 0.125 2.720 “* 3.780 ... 8.000 *‘* 3.781
S x R 2 0.198 0.337 0.292 0.292 4.760
Error (b) 6 0.247 0.142 0.215 0.205 1.079
Topdressing Treatment, T 3 2.857 *“ 0.639 1.707 ... 0.097 0.902
S x T 6 0.207 0.149 0.203 0.153 0.443
R x T 3 0.245 0.231 0.068 0.009 0.947
S x R x T 6 0.360 0.068 0.190 0.356 0.385
Error (c) 36 0.164 0.241 0.135 0.188 0.397
CV (%) 5.780 7.377 5.280 6.270 8.886
1997
Source of Van'ation df 14—Apr 19-Jun 7-Jul 14-Jul 31-Jul
Replication 2 0.847 *" 1.073 ... 0.420 0.056 0.010
Soil, 8 2 0.597 *" 0.948 ... 0.420 0.389 1.344
Error (3 ) 4 0.076 0.052 0.441 0.649 1.557
Roll, R 1 0.000 1.837 ... 9.031 *** 4.753 *" 0.281
S x R 2 0.792 0.462 ** 0.385 0.514 0.823
Error (b) 6 0.278 0.087 0.392 0.583 0.653
Topdressing Treatment, T 3 0.093 0.300 1.716 .... 0.550 '* 0.161
S x T 6 0.023 0.216 0.383 0.588 *“' 0.140
R x T 3 0.111 0.291 0.531 0.031 0.050
S x R x T 6 0.069 0.749 0.497 0.083 0.119
Error (c) 36 0.065 0.378 0.237 0.175 0.097
CV (96) 4.263 9.257 7.050 6.357 4.634

 

..., "' denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively

43

9.83 8.338% 88282 mm; ucmm m
.805 {mu um new 682.565 n? .298 m .. F m co 88:85 mm; .630 a

mod .I. m “m €96.56 22:82:85 96 .28. m @558 .o: 888 “8528: 9:28 88 55:3 e
28:28 82 u wz 52,888. 86 .68 v o. a 8:888 8888 88:8 .... ...:

 

 

 

 

I ”Z I to. it: I ”Z I I ”Z I I W2 I I WZI ...: I $2 I c: 5GOCNOECM_W
0.0 n.00 30.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 05.0 v.0 00.0 mUC$0
5.0 n_$0.0 $0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00.0 0.0 50.0 UC$0 EEN.0 .0 539.: EEN.0
5.0 n$0.0 $0.5 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 $v.5 0.0 $.0.5 .509: 550.0
we and new 8 a... NN a... EN 8 £8 882 EENN

mucoEucmE" $68685

I ”Z I #8 .15 «to I $2 I I $2 I «6* an; «it I W2 I QOCNOEC0_W
0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.5 N.5 N.5 0.0 0.5 “Om—.0.— “Om
5M0 0A0 0fiw may n20 “W0 0A0 5M0 020 n85 Um=0m_

95:01

.m2. .m2. .m2. ...... .. -mz- -wz- .m2. .m2. -wz- 2882285
0.5 5.0 _..5 nv.0 $_..0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.5 o>=$Z
0.0 0.0 0.0 $0.0 $0.0 N.5 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.5 etc—.60
0.0 v.0 0.0 $0.0 n£04..“ v.5 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.5 (003

33-—.0 .2.qu .375 £370? ..Q<Iv_. 0000—. amwu0w ammum 370—. :370N $9»... :00

 

5mm _.

 

0mm _.

 

H .29ch 888mm mmmqmta. x088: 9: «a 8m=8 89m 9556
:0 858.. 8.8 cc £8.58: 958282 on. new 65:9 .83 8:03:88 .6 £88 :85. Km 28.5

44

No significant interactions below P < 0.05 were recorded in 1996. Two
interactions were recorded in 1997 for color ratings. On 14-Jul a soil-by-
topdressing interaction (Table 28) showed that the 9.5mm crumb rubber
topdressing treatment had significantly lower color rating on USGA soil than the
other two soil types. The soil-by-roll interaction on 19-Jul-97 showed that color in
the 80:10:10 and native soils declined significantly while rolling did not adversely

effect the USGA soil.

Quality

Significant treatment effects for quality ratings are presented in Table 28.
Due to color being a primary factor in the rating or quality, results for the main
effects of soil type and rolling were similar to those recorded for_quality. No
differences in quality were recorded among soil types through both years of the
study (Table 29). Rolling consistently decreased quality except on 22-Jul where
rolling caused higher ratings in quality. Density is one factor in rating for quality.
With a reduction in quality and therefore a potentially less dense turf, Poa annua
may have an opportunity to establish in the open canopy.

On 28-Jun-96, four days after the final application of crumb rubber, the
9.5mm plots showed lower quality than all other topdressing treatments (Table
30). This may be attributed to the presence of rubber near the turfgrass surface
and thus increasing temperatures to the point that quality was adversely affected.

Vanini (1995) noted temperature increases due to the presence of crumb rubber.

45

00.00.... 000.005 000000000. 002. 0000 m

.0006 .000 nm 000 00020305 H? 0.080 - v 0 00 00.00.05 003 .200 H

mod n 0 .0 00.0.0.0 2.0000090 00 .000. 0 000000 .00 00000. 000000.. 0.00. 00.00.00. 0000 0.5.2. 4,
00.0 .50 v n. .0 8:80.000 .8880 8.800 ....
h000000.005

 

 

 

 

 

000.0 800.0 000.0 8005.0 05.0 0N0 0202
08.0 080.0 000.0 8000.0 00.5 00.0 o 0 Ho P H00
0000 00005.0 00.0 0000.0 000.0 000.0 <00:
@0000 .0002 0.050 .0000. 0.0.0.0 .0002 0.05.0 00:01-02 00:0”. ..00
.0 0000 0.00.0

50.37: 50-0072.

00000.20. 005.00.. 3.000.002-3460 00:00.00.

__o._-..n-__o0

 

0 ...). $5000.. .000 00.000 00.0000”. 000.95... x0800... 00. 00 00:8 000.0 00.0%
00 000.80.20. 00.0.00... 00.000.000.->0-__00 000 ..o.->0-._o0 0000.090 00. .00 000.0. 00.00 .0N 0.00...

6
4

Table 29. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects on quality of
putting greens collars at the Hancock Tugqrass Research Centerl. East Lansing, MI.

 

 

 

 

 

1996

Source of Variation df 28-Jun 18-Jul 1-Oct 16-Oct
Replication 2 1.01 0.39 1.26 3.43
Soil, S 2 1.09 0.97 0.32 0.38
Error (a ) 4 0.68 0.67 1.97 2.97
Roll, R 1 0.68 5.56 *** 36.13 *** 15.59 ***
S x R 2 0.17 0.63 0.20 0.11
Error (b) 6 0.14 0.24 1.29 0.67
Topdressing Treatme 3 2.76 ... 0.64 *“ 3.52 ”* 4.03 ***
S x T 6 0.18 0.05 0.58 0.24

R x T 3 0.16 0.25 0.32 0.79
SxRxT 6 0.17 0.16 0.17 0.28
Error (c) 36 0.13 0.12 0.41 0.30
CV (%) 5.34 5.21 9.62 7.83

1997

Source of Variation df 7-Jul 14-Jul 22-Jul 31-Jul
Replication 2 0.69 2.06 4.75 0.36
Soil, S 2 0.68 1.72 3.23 3.38
Error (a ) 4 0.25 2.09 1.73 2.15
Roll, R 1 18.00 *“ 12.9'2 *** 11.28 *“ 5.84

S x R 2 0.29 0.01 0.03 2.65
Error (b) 6 0.51 0.29 0.71 1.16
Topdressing-Treatme 3 1.45 *** 1.35 ** 1.55 *** 1.66 m
S x T ' 6 0.05 0.40 0.20 0.45

R x T 3 0.07 0.06 0.33 0.08

S x R x T 6 0.52 ** 0.32 0.19 0.67
Error (0) 36 0.19 0.52 0.26 0.37
CV (%) 6.31 11.07 55.91 9.19

 

m, “ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively

47

00.003 00.5008 00000.80. 00.... 0000 m

...3. 5.2.0: .00000 000.0 ...00 um 000 ..00 0.0005. 0000 "P 0.000 0-. 0 00 00.03.08 00.5 .....030 a
00.0 n 0 .0 E0800 2.08.2020 0.0 .000. 0 00.800 .00 00000. .8088. 050.00 0000 0.0..>> .-
...80090 .02 u 02 :00 v n. .0 80805.0 8.2.0.0 8.200

 

 

t: «a: I wz I :5 I wz I I $2 I cc. :3 at: I; #00C8_u_cm_w
9N0 90.0 N.0 90.0 0.0 0.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 09.0w
900.0 90.0 0.0 90.0 0.0 0.0 00.0 09v.0 095.0 00.0 0:00 SEN-0 .0 .0993. EENd
00.0 00.0 0.0 0N5 _-.0 5.0 00.5 00.5 00.0 970 .0993. 5.80.0
00.0 9...0 0.0 00.5 ...0 v.0 90.5 90.0 900.0 00.5 .0993. EENd
mucmEUCQE< drzmmmguaph

I $2 I :5 :5 :5 I wz I I $2 I at. :5 4:. I $2 I OUCNU=_CO_W
0.0 0.0 0.0 v.5 N0 5.0 v.5 V5 5 0.0 00:01 .02
0.0 0.0 _-.0 v.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 00:01
9.50m

-02- -02- -02- -02- -02- -02- -02- -02- -02- -02- 8:80.090
...5 0.0 0.0 5 5.0 v.0 v.5 0.0 5 0.0 02.02
0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0 0.0 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 OTC—.50
V0 0.0 0.0 5 N0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 (003
09C. :00

 

 

3.3—.0 .00-mm .00-3. .00-5 030-0.- .0<-v_- .00-0.. .00-.- 370.- 0:700

 

500w , 000—-

 

." ...2 $0.08.. .000 ..0.000 8.00000 000303 0.0800: 00. .0 08:00 000.0
05.50 00 000.8. .....030 00 $008.00.. 00.002000. 0.... 000 .0050. .00... 00.82.0000 .0 0.00.00 0.05. :00 0.8 .-

48

After the crumb rubber moved below the surface and into the crown area of the
plant, quality ratings increased. On all other dates that quality was significant, the
9.5mm plots showed better quality than the sand treatment and often was better
than all other treatments.

A three way, soil-by-roll-by-topdressing treatment interaction was recorded
on 7-Jul-97 (Table 31). Regarding the 9.5mm rubber topdressing treatment, the
USGA soil showed no differences between rolled and not-rolled plots. The other
two soil types (80:10:10 and native) however, showed that rolling significantly
decreased quality. Also, the highest quality ratings came from 9.5mm
topdressing treatments that were rolled in both 80:10:10 and native soils.

Poa annua

Poa annua is an aggressive species known to invade close cut, irrigated,
intensively maintained turfgrass stands within a period of 3 to 5 years after
establishment (Beard, 1973). Hartwiger et al (1994) found that rolling four times
per week reduced putting green quality after one year. This decrease in quality
could lead to decreased density and therefore an opening in the turfgrass canopy
to allow Poa annua room for invasion.

Treatment effects and significance for Poa annua invasion ratings are
shown in Table 32. Both rolling and topdressing treatments showed significant
differences in Poa annua ratings. Rolling caused increased Poa annua over plots
that were not rolled on all data collection dates. Plots receiving 9.5mm crumb
rubber had significantly less Poa annua than plots receiving only sand

topdressing (Table 33).

49

Table 31. Soil by roll by topdressing treatment interaction for quality ratings
on putting green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, 1997.3

USGA/rolled/3.2mm rubber
USGA/rolled/9.5mm rubber
USGNroIIed/3.2mm rubber & 3.2mm sand
USGA/rolledlsand§

USGA/not rolled/3.2mm rubber

USGA/not rolled/9.5mm rubber

USGA/not rolled/3.2mm rubber 8- 3.2mm sand
USGA/not rolled/sand§

80:10:10/rolledl3.2mm rubber
80:10:10/rolled/9.5mm rubber
80:10:10/rolledl3.2mm rubber & 3.2mm sand
80:10:10/rolled/sands

80:10:10/not rolled/3.2mm rubber
80:10:10/not rolled/9.5mm mbber
80:10:10/not rolled/3.2mm rubber & 3.2mm sand
80:10:10/not rolled/sand§

Native/rolled/3.2mm rubber
Native/rolled/9.5mm rubber
Native/rolledl3.2mm rubber & 3.2mm sand
Native/rolled/sand§

Native/notrolled13.2mm rubber

Native/not rolled/9.5mm rubber

Native/not rolled/3.2mm rubber 8. 3.2mm sand
Native/not rolled/sand§

Significance"
” denotes statistical significance at P < 0.05

7-Jul

6.5 eghi
7.2 bcdef
6.5 eghi
6.0 ij

7.7 abc
7.3 bcdef
7.2 bcdef
7.3 bcdef
6.3 gij
6.3 gij
5.7]

5.8 ij

7.3 bcd
7.8 ab

7.2 bcdefg
6.8 defgh
6.8 defgh
6.3 hij

6.3 hij

6.5 fghi
7.3 bcdf
8.2 a

7.0 cdefgh
7.2 bcdefh

t.

T Treatment means not sharing a' letter are significantly different at a = 0.05
t Quality was evaluated on a 1-9 scale, 1: dead turf/bare soil and 9= dark green,

dense, uniform turf.
§ Sand was topdressed every three weeks

50

Table 32. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects on Poa annua invasion
putting green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing,:MI

 

 

 

 

 

Poa annua
1996 1997

16-Oct 5-Oct 28-May 10-Oct
§ource of Variation gt
Replication 2 500 369 550 972
Soil, 8 2 462 420 918 764
Error (a ) 4 208 196 468 484
Roll, R 1 2965 *** 2901 *** 5513 *** 5548 **
S x R - 2 28 12 . 14 480
Error (b) 6 72 103 167 448
Topdressing Treatment, T 3 257 ... 288 *" 500 “* 961 *"
S x T 6 . 48 52 61 88
R x T 3 64 71 ‘* 145 *" 139
SxRxT 6 110 49 110 175
Error (c) 36 57 23 50 172
CV (%) 41 33 33 48

 

“'3 “ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively

51

Table 33. Effects of construction type, rolling, and the topdressing treatments on Poa annua
invasion ratings on putting green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East

Lansing, MI.

Poa annua %

 

 

 

1996 1997

Soil Type Oct 180:: 28-May 10-Oct
USGA 9.7 13.7 14.3 20.5
80:10:10 17.5 22.3 25.8 30.2
Native 18.3 19.4 24.2 30.4
Significance? - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS -
am

Rolled 20.8 24.9 30.2 35.8
Not Rolled 8.1 12 12.7 18.3
Simificance 00'. m Q“ .0
Topdressing Amendments

3.2mm Rubber 15.8a 20.0a 23.1ab 25.9ab
9.5mm Rubber 8.7b 12.9b 14.5c 17.3b
3.2mm Rubber & 3.2mm Sand 15.7a 19.6b 20.9b 30.8a
Sand’ 17.8a 21 .3b 27.1a 34.2a
flanificancet it. to. .0. t“

 

“', " denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively; NS = Not Significant
1’ Within each column treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05
1 Sand was topdressed every three weeks.

Table 34. Roll by topdressing treatment interaction for Poa annua invasion ratings on putting
green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

Poa annua %

 

 

 

5—Oct-96 28-May-97
Topdressing Amendglents Rolled Not-Rolled Rolled Not-Rolled
3.2mm Rubber 22.8a 8.9bc 33.7ab 12.6de
9.5mm Rubber 12.2b 5.10 20.9cd 8.1e
3.2mm Rubber & 3.2mm Sand 23.93 7.4bc. 27.2bc 14.7de
Sand‘ 24.4a 11.1b 38.9a 15.3d
Marne? n n

 

" denotes statistical significance at P < 0.05

1' Wlthin each column and between each row, means not sharing a letter are significantly different
at a = 0.05

1: Sand was topdressed every three weeks.

52

A roll-by-topdressing treatment interaction was recorded on 5-0ct-96 and
28-May-97. No other interactions were recorded. On 5-Oct-96 the 9.5mm depth
of crumb rubber had significantly less Poa annua than the other topdressing
treatments when rolling was applied (Table 34). The 28-May-97 date showed
that the 9.5mm depth of crumb rubber had significantly less Poa annua than the
3.2mm crumb rubber depth and the sand treatment. These results may be the
result of crumb rubbers’ ability to prevent compaction and therefore maintain
turfgrass quality under trafficked situations (Rogers et al, 1998) thus not giving

Poa annua the opportunity to invade the stand.

Shearvane

Mean squares and significant treatment effects of shearvane and peak
deceleration values are given in Table 35. Shear resistance values were higher
in 1997 than in 1996 for all main effects (Table 36). Vanini (1995) found that
shear resistance values were different between the first and second years after
crumb rubber was topdressed. In the first year of the study crumb rubber
particles were still in and around the turf canopy and had not reached the soil
surface. After a growing season, the crumb rubber particles had reached the soil
surface and were simultaneously protecting the crown tissue area of the plant
thus allowing for more resistance to shearing. Topdressing amendments did not
show consistent shear resistance values though significant differences were
observed at each data collection date. In 1996 on the first data collection date of

12-Aug, the 9.5mm crumb rubber depth had lower shear resistance values than

53

282838. mod .56 v 0 a 838:5... .8335 8.2% ..

 

 

no 0.» «a no we. to at >0

4.3 new 3m 3 we 2. a Q 85 .
as «S New No 3 3 0 ex m xm
od ”.2 ode 3 no No a . a. x m
«.9 «.3 «be be no 3 o a. x w
«new eta $3 oi .. o...” ed m .3958: 9888.88
31 2% 2K to 39 3 o E Sew
30 N.» .. <va 3 mt .. «.8 N m x m
«Rm .. $8 09.9 3.. «.3 2: F m ...om.
v. x: 3: 2:9 m8 3 3 e :3 Saw
«.8? 33 SS 3m .. at .. 0.8 N m .__o.w
No.3 $3 35 5 Nb .. N: N coeegabm
Hm c§m> .0 8.50m

nméaqrmw hmfimifi owl—3 -VN hmésqrm mm. m -9. om-m:<-N—.

 

 

ago @5235

 

.5 $533 «mum c250 22331 329.3 3.08ch on. an
89.8 :35 95.2. :0 320 6:0 9.523% .0 2083 2953: 3 3:35:98. new menace. cam—2 .mm 2an

Table 36. Effects of construction type, rolling, and the topdressing treatments on shearvane resistance (Nm)

and peak deceleration (Gm) on putting green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shear resistance (Nm) Peak Deceleration (Gm)
1996 1997 199_6

Soil T199 12-Aug 18-S_eg 5-Jun 24-Jul 7—May 25-Jm
USGA 11.2b 11.2b 17.3 66.6 69.7 64.7
80:1010 12.0b 12.0ab 18.8 64.1 70 63.9
Native 13.0a 12.9a 19.6 73.5 73.8 69.3
weal *- ~ -NS- -NS- -Ns. -NS-
Baum
ruled 11.7 11.6 18.8 72.2 72.7 68.9
not rolled 12.5 12.5 18.4 63.9 68.2 63
Significance -NS- -NS- -NS- ... “ -NS-
T ressin Amendments
3.2mm Rubber 13.0a 12.3ab 19.4a 70.0ab 71 .8a 66.8b
9.5mm Rubber 11.3c 12.5a 19.0a 61 .7c 65.3b 61 .6c
3.2mm Rubber & 3.2mm Sand 11.8bc 11.6c 17.4b 67.7b 728a 65.1b
Sand‘ 12.2b 11.8bc 18.6a 72.9a 72.0a 70.4a

 

.... " denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01. 0.05 respectively; NS = Not Significant
1' thin each column treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05
:t Sand was topdressed every three weeks.

Table 37. Soil by roll interaction for shearvane resistance (Nm) and peak deceleration
(Gm) on putting green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI, 1996.

 

 

 

 

Shear Resistance (Nm) Peak Deceleration (Gm)
12-Agg 24-Jul
Soil Type Rolled Not Rolled Rolled Not Rolled
USGA 10.3c 12. 1 b 70.5ab 62.6b
80:10:10 12.7ab 11.3bc 64.2b 64.1b
Native 12.1 b 13.9a 82.0a 65.0b
significance? 1" -

 

"‘ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.05
letllineachcolumnandbetweeneachrow, meansnotsharingaletteraresignificentlydifferentata=005

55

the sand topdressed plots. Later in that year, on 18-Sep, the highest rate of
crumb rubber of 9.5mm had significantly greater shear resistance than the sand
topdressed plots. On 5-Jun-97 the rubber and sand mixed plots had significantly
lower shear resistant than all other plots. The native soil produced significantly
higher shear resistance values than the USGA soil for both dates in 1996. This
was also seen in 1997 though the differences were not statistically significant. An
interaction between rolling and soil type was recorded on 12 Aug 96 for shear
resistance values (Table 37). This interaction showed that the USGA and native
soils produced significantly lower shear resistance when rolled while the 80:10:10

did not show a difference between rolled and not-rolled plots.

Peak Deceleration

The main effect of soil type did not have an effect on surface hardness.
Rolling produced a significantly harder surface (Table 36). Previous work by
Rogers and Waddington in 1992 also showed that when surfaces were rolled and
thus compacted, peak deceleration values were significantly higher than non-
compacted plots. The depth of crumb rubber topdressing also affected surface
hardness. The greatest depth of crumb rubber (9.5mm) showed significantly
lower peak deceleration (Gm) values than other topdressing treatments- This
result agrees with the findings of Rogers et al (1998) that showed that peak
deceleration values decreased as crumb rubber topdressing depths increased,
indicating a softer surface. Soil type and rolling produced a significant interaction

with regards to surface hardness on 24-Jul-96 (Table 37). When rolled, the

56

surface hardness of the native soil increased significantly while the sand-based

soils were not affected by rolling.

Dollar Spot

Dollar spot counts were taken when disease outbreak was present. Dollar
spot incidence showed significant differences in 1996 while no statistical
significance was recorded in 1997. Significant treatment effects are given in
Table 38. In both seasons, no significant differences in dollar spot incidence
were observed between soil types. On the same plots where research was also
being conducted at putting green heights, Nikolai et al (1998) found that USGA
and 80:10:10 soils produced significantly more dollar spots than the native soil.
The higher mowing height of the putting green collars may have affected the lack
of differences in dollar spot incidence. In 1996, rolling significantly reduced dollar
spot incidence over not rolled plots (Table 39). This reaction was not seen in
1 997.

In 1996 significant soil-by-topdressing interactions were observed on both
data collection dates (Table 40). In both interactions the 3.2mm crumb rubber
depth produced significantly greater numbers of dollar spots in the USGA soil
than the native soil. Other treatments did not have significant differences

between the USGA and native soils.

57

Table 38. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects of dollar spot counts on
gutting green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, Ml.

 

 

1996 1997

Source of Variation 9: 30-Aug 5-Seg 23-Jun ZS-Jul
Replication 2 373.0 2823.5 1233.0 1163.4
Soil, S 2 191.2 539.4 203.4 158.4
Error (a ) 4 185.4 660.9 277.6 351.6
Roll, R 1 3626.7 **" 7340.7 '*" 0.2 0.1
S x R 2 26.4 187.1 757.4 691.7
Error (b) 6 68.7 232.3 299.5 302.0
Topdressing Treatment, T 3 59.9 135.9 40.8 38.0
S x T 6 182.7 ’* 408.6 *" 49.1 44.0
R x T 3 19.9 62.1 16.5 33.8
S x R x T 6 66.7 156.9 51.1 51.4
Enor (c) 36 58.0 114.2 45.6 45.2
CV (%) 54.6 47.1 63.4 67.6

 

*'*, “ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively

58

Table 39. Main effects of construction type, rolling, and the topdressing treatments on dollar spot
counts on putting_green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI 1996.

dollar spots/m2

 

 

 

 

Soil Tyge 30-Aug 5—Sep
USGA 10.8 17.7
80:10:10 7.4 13.3
Native 8.2 12.0
Significance? - NS - - NS -
Rolling

Rolled 4.4 8.0
Not Rolled 13.4 20.8
Significance ... '“
Topdressing Amendments

3.2mm Rubber 10.2 16.6
9.5mm Rubber 7.3 12.4
3.2mm Rubber 8 3.2mm Sand 8.8 14.4
Sand‘ 90 14.0
§i_gnificancet - NS - - NS -

 

“‘ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01 ; NS = Not Significant

1’ Within each column treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05

1 Sand was topdressed every three weeks.

Table 40. Soil by t0pdressing interaction on dollar spot counts on putting green collars at the
Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI, 1996.

 

 

 

. 30-fl 5-Sep
Togdressing Treatment USGA 80:10: 10 Native USGA 80:10:10 Native
3.2mm Rubber 25.2a 15.2abcd 7.8d 40.0a 25.8abcd 12.800
9.5mm Rubber 9.8cd 11 .7bcd 13.3bcd 15.2de 23.3abcd 20.2bcd
3.2mm Rubber 8 3.2mm Sand 143de 87de 18.8abc 25.7bcd 16.7bcd 23.2abd
Sand‘ 19.2ab 11.3bcd 17.0bcd 31 .3abc 18.0bcd 17.0bcd
_S_ig£ificanceT " ""

 

“‘2 " denotes statistical significance at P < 0.01, 0.05 respectively

1 Within each column and between each row, means not sharing a letter are significantly different

at a = 0.05
:1: Sand was topdressed every three weeks.

59

Root Mass

Mean squares and significant treatment effects are given in Table 41.
Topdressing treatments at the 0-2.5cm and 0-15cm depths showed significant
differences in root weights in 1996 and were not significant in 1997 (Tables 42
and 43). Sand topdressing produced more roots than 3.2mm of crumb rubber at
the 0-2.5cm sampling depth in 1996. When combining all four sampling depths
(0—15cm), sand topdressing produced significantly more roots than both the
3.2mm and 9.5mm depths. In 1997 the native soil produced more roots at the
2.5-5.0cm depth than the sand-based plots.

Interactions for root mass were observed at the 2.5-5.0cm and 0-15cm
depths. In 1996 a soil-by-roll interaction at the 2.5-5.0cm depth showed that the
USGA produced significantly fewer roots when rolling was applied while the
80:10:10 and native soils did not show decreases in rooting as a result of
rolling(Table 44). In 1996 an interaction also occurred at the 0-15cm depth
between soil and topdressing treatments(Table 44). The USGA soil produced
significantly more roots under sand topdressing treatments than the crumb
rubber. The third interaction involving rooting occurred in 1997 at the 0-15cm
depth where the sand topdressing plots produced significantly more roots than
the other topdressing treatments when rolling was not applied (Table 45). Under
rolled conditions there were no differences between topdressing treatments.
These findings are in contrast with those of Vanini (1995) who showed that as

crumb rubber rates increased, rooting at the 0-5cm sampling depth increased

60

Table 41. Mean squares and significance of treatment effects of root mass measurements on putting
green collars at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI.

 

 

1996
Sogrcg gf Variation 9! 0-2. 50m 2. 5-5cm 51 Gem 10-1 5cm 0-150m
Replication 2 49854.43 778.57 6744.41 630.03 65647.31
Soil, S 2 16164. 91 232.79 873.58 582.98 30768.84
Error (a ) 4 52904.37 151 1.35 1203.05 512.16 49853.64
Roll, R 1 29589. 34 106.58 59.04 643. 81 20736.66
S x R 2 7196.49 3519.23 *' 3729.27 842.65 49996.48
Error (b) 6 9498. 97 523.84 923.71 450.60 15299.29
Topdressing Treatment, T 3 24854.18 “ 948.68 601.51 132.24 40682.50
S x T 6 1 8637.99 178.95 . 1508.85 316.47 38348.25
R x T 3 427.93 172.49 489.62 168.15 1712.52
8 x R x T 6 3102.54 59.91 348.56 238.30 4073.40
Error (c) 36 8011.20 405.44 714.02 150.13 14378.20
CV (96) 37.91 31.05 42.75 39.03 30.37
1997
Source 9f Variation 1f 0-2.50m 2.5-5cm '5-100m 10-15cm 0-150m
Replication 2 0.0345 0.0014 0.0002 0.0002 0.0680
Soil, S 2 0.0078 0.0044 “ 0.0030 0.0003 0.0540
Error (a ) 4 0.0196 0.0003 0.0001 0.0002 0.0240
Roll, R 1 0.0003 0.0008 0.0007 0.0005 0.0006
S x R 2 0.0124 0.0009 0.0023 0.0004 0.0350
Error (b) 6 0.0067 0.0009 0.0005 0.0001 0.0170
Topdressing Treatment, T 3 0.0152 0.0006 0.0002 0.0000 0.0310
S x T 6 0.0111 0.0005 0.0007 0.0001 0.0140
R x T 3 0.0193 0.0008 0.0004 0.0000 0.041 0
S x R x T 6 0.0074 0.0003 0.0004 0.0000 0.0110
Error (8) 36 0.0098 0.0000 0.0002 0.0001 0.011 1
CV (96) 49.67 41.25 36.1 0 44.81 38.99

 

"' denotes statistical significance at P < 0.05

61

Table 42. Main effects of construction type, rolling, topdressing treatments on root weights
on gutting greens collars at the Hancock Turfggss Research Center, East Lansfig, MI 1996.

 

grams/mm

0—2.Scm 2.5-5cm 5-10cm 10-150m O-150m
.Seillme
USGA 3.2 0.8 1.7 0.9 15.7
80:10:10 2.5 0.8 1.5 0.6 13.1
Native 3.0 0.8 1.4 0.8 14.7
Significance - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS -
Rolling
Rolled 3.1 0.8 1.6 0.7 15.1
Not Rolled 2.6 0.8 1.5 0.8 13.9
Significance - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS —
Topdressing Amendments
3.2mm rubber 2.4b 0.8 1.4 0.8 12.8b
9.5mm rubber 2.7ab 0.7 1.5 0.7 13.4b
3.2mm rubber 8 3.2mm Sand 3.1 ab 0.9 1.5 0.7 15.3ab
Sand’ 3.4a 0.8 1.7 0.8 16.6a
flgnificancet “ - NS - - NS - - NS - “

 

”, ‘ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.05, 0.10 respectively; NS = Not Significant
1‘ Within each column treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05

1: Sand was topdressed every three weeks.

Table 43. Main effects of construction type, rolling, topdressing treatments on root weights
on putting_greens collars at the Hancock Turfgass Research Center, East Lansing, MI 1997.

 

grams/mm3

» 0-2.5cm 2.5-50m 5-10cm 10—150m 0—15cm
Soil Tyge
USGA 2.2 0.4b 0.8 0.4 8.6
80:10:10 2.4 0.6b 1.1 0.4 9.3
Native 2.8 0.88 1.6 0.5 11.9
Significance - NS — " - NS - - NS - - NS -
Rolling
Roled 2.4 0.5 . 1.1 0.4 10.1
Not rolled 2.4 0.6 1.3 0.5 9.8
Significance - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS -
ngdressing Amendments
3.2mm rubber 2.3 0.7 1.4 0.5 9.3
9.5mm rubber 2.1 0.5 1.1 0.4 9.0
3.2mm rubber 8 3.2mm Sand 2.4 0.5 1.1 0.4 9.3
Sand‘ _ 3.0 0.6 1.1 0.4 12.2
Siggificance’ - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS - - NS -

 

“ denotes statistical significance at P < 0.05; NS = Not Significant
1' Within each column treatment means not sharing a letter are significantly different at a = 0.05
1 Sand was topdressed every three weeks.

62

.3083 8...: ago 389.32 mm; team R
mo. an e E 288.6 22825..» Ea Lose. a 2:2» 8: mceoE .26.. 53 5923 can. c828 none 55.2, e
me. o v 8 s 8:858..." .8888 888... ..

 

... .85....de

8.: 8... “use

a: 58.8 85 SEN.» a .88. same...

5... 8.» .82: 5&3

8... 88.2 .882 sewn
.lllllee..em 82 :8

 

 

Sam—u Eu 2. . o

 

.32 .358 5.633.. 889...; 3.08ch
e... .a 22.8 :35 9.23 so mEEBEEQ 5:925 88 .8 5.8825 EoEfio... 3.30.32-34.23”. .3 min...

9.83 025 to; 33232 was team u

3.: u a E 296:6 22853..." «3 Lose. a 9.52% .o: 252: .32 some 5223 use =E28 some 55.3 e
8... v 8 a 882.2% .8888 8.2.8 ..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

t : eoo:8=_cu_w
3.3 93.2. a v.3. 3.3 936 236 0252
and? 8.9 8.3 3.3 good awad o to tow
av.- no.3 a ...NP and? and nod (09..
eucew ucmm EEmd a. $8.3 EENd “one: EEmd .252 EENd 62.61 “oz 62.3.. HE. __ow
ficosfiofltmsmmeaob nedwé ceded
Egon Eu 3 - a Save Eoméd

 

.83 .5 $523 new ...250 5.38m $95.5... 3.08:6... 05 .e 22.8 52:52:. so

22888:. Segue... 2.8232 36.6» new =8.E-a:_=e 23553 05 Lo. AeEEBEEB 8292995801 .3. can...

63

incrementally. In this study, sand topdressed plots caused the differences in both

main effects and interactions.

Turfgrass Responses

Significant treatment effects of thatch depth, thatch weight, surface
temperature, soil temperature, and microdochium patch counts are given in
Table 46. No significant interactions were reported for these data. Thatch depth
did produce significance for all main effects (Table 47). Thatch depth was
greater in native soil than in USGA soil. Rolling significantly reduced thatch
below that of not-rolled plots. Thatch depth was also significant for topdressing
treatments where the greatest depth of crumb rubber produced the deepest
thatch and the sand had shallower thatch than all other treatments. When
measuring thatch depth the presence of the crumb rubber may have influenced
measurements. Thatch weight measurements taken in 1997 produced
significant differences among topdressing treatments. The 9.5mm crumb rubber
treatment had significantly more thatch than the 3.2mm depth. Both topdressing
treatments receiving sand topdressing produced significantly more thatch than
the treatments with crumb rubber alone. When measurements were recorded,
crumb rubber was present in the thatch, which may have effected the results. In
the ashing process, which separates the organic matter from the soil particles,
the crumb rubber was ashed and probably affected the final results since the

weight of the rubber was included in the pre-ashing weight measurements.

64

mad . 56 v l E cosmo:_ca_m Roswzmfi 35:05 2. ...:

 

 

N. «a Né a.N cap h.N_. soy >0
fiaN ad a.a as ad on A8 Lotm
a.mN ad N.a ad ad. a .r x m x .w
v.aN No fr a.a war a ... x m
0.2. v.9 mN o6 a. ..F a ... x m
f: ...: aéN 9a.. ...... N.N: e2. v.ao~ a ._. Jam—Ewe... 9.789ch
NNNF Ya . o.N—. a. ..P N.aN a fly ..otm
héNv _..P a.N a.N ad N m x w

2. aaah v.» a.aN N... .... Tao? p m .__om
adaw 0.3. Na? v.2. a.Nw v A3 ..ctm
N.N¢N m.a RON Nd .... —.._.a N w .__ow
maaa 2; N.aaN a.a .... o._.a h.Nm N cozmflamm

3.54:: ha-_:_.-ow aaéErv Rain—raw aaéaaéw Hm cozmtm> a0 850$

 

 

 

EoEsocw 832258. .8 8.36.388... moataw 392$ :22... Emma 5.2:.

 

._s_ .9723.— «new .3250 3288”. 3235... 3.8051

2: .a 223° :35 955.. cc =8 .2903 :22: .5%“. :22: 3 «vote EeEEe: 3 8:355.» use 8.33 cues. .3 can...

65

 

.333 025 Ego 330.38 83 team H
mod n a «a «5.8% 268533 Ba .83. m actmcm «o: memos. Emgag 5:28 :03 2233 +
28555 .02 u wz ”3028038 mod . Ed v Q «a 8:855? .8?»sz 86:2. .. ...:

 

 

 

 

 

 

n m2 .. at. 2. cc. cc. hOOCflOECgWI

a.a aadw a flaw «New 3.: ”acmw

N. 2 93.3 afiaN 8.8 9.3 team EE~.a .a .0331 EEN.a

a.a 0&3 Sam stow modw .oaaam EEma

P. 2 nadw 3.3 0a.: 8.9 .233”. EEN.a

EcoEucoE< affineuqoh

.. - mz - - mz - - mz - .. 850556

ad. a.aN a.aN a. _N am. uo=om 82

E. taN QR a. .N ..a. 3:01

méom

- wz - - wz - - m2 - - m2 - .. h8:85:9w

as «6N a.aN v. E no.9 0262

Va a.aN ER a. N 58.: ototoa

0a. mdN NKN a. E and. (Gas

5.5.1.3 3.52: 8.5.4 3-5.79 8-579 2.: :5
20.5.65 3% mismatch gem Aoov 22809:»... 33.5 ~95 Emma; :82... ASE sumo 529:.

 

.=2 652.3 “mum £350 58381 «83.5...
x0851 05 «a 23.8 :85 9.23 no 2035.55 5 5%.. :82: co 2:95am: asmweuao. 05 new 6:52 .25 5:02.28 3 825m .3. 293

66

Surface temperature measurements showed that the 9.5mm rubber depth had
significantly higher temperatures than the other treatments. Soil temperatures
showed that the 9.5mm depth had significantly loWer temperatures than the other
topdressing treatments. Microdochium patch counts were recorded on 14-Apr-97
and showed that rolling significantly reduced snowmold incidence when
compared with not-rolled plots.

Qonclusions

The USGA soil showed a decrease in color in the spring of 1997 while on
19-Jun—97 the native soil had significantly poorer color than the sand-based soils.
Rolling caused a decrease in color and quality for both seasons. As was shown
by Vanini (1995), topdressing with crumb rubber can improve turfgrass color. In
the interaction between soil and topdressing treatments on 14-Jul-97, however,
the highest rate of crumb rubber (9.5mm) did have significantly lower color
ratings than the other topdressing treatments in the USGA soil. This interaction
was only seen on this date.

Both rolling and topdressing treatments produced significant differences in
quality. One of the primary factors in quality ratings is density. Since Poa annua
has the ability to produce abundant, viable seed even at low cutting heights
(Beard, 1973), a decrease in density could give Poa annua the opportunity to
germinate and thrive. On all of the dates that Poa annua ratings were taken, the
highest rate of crumb rubber (9.5mm) had significantly less Poa annua than the
check plots. Hartwiger et al (1994) found that rolling decreased quality after one

year. The practice of rolling also produced significantly more Poa annua. Two

67

interactions between rolling and topdressing treatments showed that the highest
rate of crumb rubber had significantly less Poa annua than all the other
topdressing treatments in both rolled and not-rolled plots.

Surface hardness measurements confirmed the findings of Rogers et al
(1998) where the highest rate of crumb rubber had the softest surface.

Being that the highest rate of crumb rubber produced the highest quality
and the least amount of Poa annua, using crumb rubber on putting green collars
is a viable option for superintendents looking to confront the problems associated

with high traffic areas around putting greens.

68

REFERENCES

Anonymous. 1954. Keep your collars neat. USGA Journal and Turf
Management. 7(4):30.

Beard, J.B. 1982. Turf Management for Golf Courses. Burgess Publishing Co.,
Minneapolis, MN.

Beard, James. B. 1973. Turfgrass Scienceand Culture. Regents/Prentice Hall.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Branham, B. 1991. 1990 Turf Weed Control, PGR, and Management Update.
61 st Annual Michigan Turfgrass Conference Proceedings. 20:2-16.

Calhoun, R. 1996. Effect of Three Plant Growth Regulators and Two Nitrogen
Regimes on Growth and Performance of Creeping Bentgrass. M.S. Thesis.
Michigan State University.

Demoeden, P. H. 1984. Four-year response of a Kentucky bluegrass-red fescue
turf to plant growth retardants. Agron. J. 76. 807-813.

Demoeden, PH. 1994. Why are our new bentgrass collars dying? Turfgrass
Matters. 46(9):4-5.

Diesburg, KL., and NE. Christians. 1989. Seasonal application of ethephon,
flurprimidol, mefluidide, paclobutrazol, and amidichlor as they affect Kentucky
bluegrass shoot morphogenisis. Crop. Sci. 29:841-847.

Hamilton, G.W.Jr., Livingston, D.W., Gover, AB 1994. The effects of light-weight
rolling on putting greens. Agronomy abstracts. 86:187.

Hartwiger, C. 1996. The ups and downs of rolling putting greens. USGA Green
Section Record 34(4)1-4.

Hartwiger, C. E.; DiPaola, J. M.; Peacock, C. H.; Cassel, D. K; Lucas, L. T.
1994. The effects of rolling bentgrass putting greens. Agronomy Abstracts.
86:184.

Henderson, R.L. 1986. Impact absorption characteristics and other properties of
turf and soil surfaces. M.Agr. Paper. University Park, PA. 16802.

70

Lodge, TA, and 0M. Lawson. 1993. The construction irrigation and fertilizer
nutrition of golf greens. Botanical and soil chemical measurements over three
years of differential treatment. J. Sports Turf Res. Inst. 69:59-73.

Lodge, T.A., S.W. Baker, P.M. Canaway, and 0M. Lawson. 1991. The
construction irrigation and fertilizer nutrition of golf greens. l. Botanical and
reflectance assessments after establishment and during the first year of
differential irrigation and nutrition treatments. J. Sports Turf Res. Inst. 67:32-43.

Nikolai, TA. and Karcher, DE. 1999. Golf Association of Michigan Field Day.
Personal communication.

Nikolai, T.A., Rieke, P.E., Karcher, DE, and McVay, NT. 1998. Turfgrass Soil
Management Research Report - 1997. 68th Annual Michigan Turfgrass
Conference Proceedings. Vol. 27:24-27.

Nikolai, T.A., Rieke, P.E., Rogers, J.N., Leach, BE, and Smucker, M. 1997.
Some pretty cool things about light weight greens rolling. 67th Annual Michigan
Turfgrass Conference Proceedings. 26:110-114.

Rogers, J.N. Ill, and D.V. Waddington. 1992. Impact absorption characteristics
on turf and soil surfaces. Agron J. 84:203-209.

Rogers, J.N. lll, T.M. Krick and J.A. Rea. 1993. The effect of plant growth
regulators on green speed.63"' Annual Michigan Turfgrass Conference
Proceedings. Vol 22: 1 5-20.

Rogers J.N. Ill, and J.T. Vanini, and JR. Crum. 1998. Simulated Traffic on
Turfgrass Topdressed With Crumb Rubber. Agron. J. 90:215-221.

Rogers, J.N., Ill, and D.V. Waddington, 1990. Portable apparatus for assessing
impact characteristics of athletic field surfaces. P. 96-110. In R.C. Schmidt, E.F.
Hoemer, E.M. Milner, and CA. Morehouse (Eds). Natural and artificial playing
fields, characteristics and safety features. ASTM STP 1073. AS

+3TM, Philadelphia.

Rogers, J.N., Nikolai, T.A., and Rea, J.A. 1992. The effect of plant growth
regulators on putting green speed and quality. 62nd Annual Michigan Turfgrass
Conference and Proceedings. Vol. 21 :3-6.

Rogers, J.N., Vargas, J.M. and Crum, J.M. 1999. Personal communication.
Skogley CR. and CD. Sawyer. 1992. Field Research. p. 589-610. Turfgrass

(ed.) D.V. Waddington, R.N. Carrow, and RC. Shearman. Agronomy No. 32.
ASA, CSSA, and SSSA Madison, WI.

71

Smucker, A.J.M., S.L. McBumey, and AK Srivastava. 1982. Quantitative
separation of roots from compacted soil profiles by the hydropneumatic eluriation
system. Agron. J. 74:500-503.

USGA Green Section Staff. 1960. Specifications for a method of putting green
construction. USGA J. Turf Management. Far Hills, NJ.

Vanini, J.T. 1995. The dynamics and diversity of crumb rubber as a soil
amendment in a variety of turfgrass settings. M.S. Thesis. Michigan State
University.

Watschke, TL. 1981. Effects of four growth retardants on two Kentucky
bluegrasses. Proc. Northeast Weed Sci. Soc. 35:322-330.

Willard, C.J. and GM. McClure. 1932. The quantitative development of tops and
roots in bluegrass with an improved method of obtaining root yields. J. Am. Soc.
Agron. 1621-5.

Yelverton, PH. 1998. Effects of trinexapac-ethyl and paclobutrazol on ball roll
and summer stress of creeping bentgrass. So. Weed Sci. Soc. Proc., 51 :68.

72

"Illlllllllllllllllllllli